r 


Z 
2S 


SCHOOL 


— iPtTBLICATIOJNTS 


OJ^THE 


Clark  University  Library 

WORCESTER,  MASS. 

Editkd  by  JLOtTIS    N.  WILSON,   Litt.   D.,  LroBAHiAN 


Vol.  3. 


January,  1912. 


No.  1. 


The  Relative  Legibility  of  Different 
Faces  of  Printing  Types 

By 

BARBARA  ELIZABETH  ROETHLEIN,  A.  M. 

Clark  University 


WORCESTER.  MASS. 


f  _  •    • 


THE  RELATIVE  LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT 
FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES 


By  Barbara  Elizabeth   Roethlein,   A.M.,   Clark  University 


Communicated  by  John  Wallace  Baird 

I.     Introductory I 

II.     Historical 2 

III.  Experimental 5 

a.  Materials  and  Apparatus 5 

b.  Method  of  Procedure        ......  7 

c.  Observers           ........  8 

d.  Results 9 

IV.  Discussion  of  Results          .......  10 

V.     Conclusions 33 

VI.     Bibliography 34 

I.    INTRODUCTORY 

The  aim  of  the  investigation  which  is  here  reported  was 
to  determine  the  relative  ease  or  difficulty  with  which  various 
'faces'^  or  forms  of  printed  letters  can  be  read;  and  to 
discover  what  relationship  obtains  between  legibility  and  cer- 
tain definite  modifications  of  'face.'  A  number  of  typically 
different  faces  of  type  were  selected  for  investigation;  and 
our  experimental  procedure  consisted  essentially  in  determin- 
ing to  what  extent  the  legibility  of  each  face  was  affected 
— both  when  the  letters  were  presented  in  isolation  and  in 
groups — by  the  introduction  of  unfavorable  conditions  for 
reading.  The  present  paper  will  deal  only  with  'type-faces'  ; 
the  question  of  the  part  which  is  played  by  printing  papers 
and  printing  inks  will  be  discussed  in  a  later  paper. 

^  The  term  '  face '  is  employed  here  and  throughout  this  paper  in 
the  sense  in  which  it  has  come  to  be  used  by  printers  and  type- 
founders. It  is  customary  to  group  the  numerous  variants  of  letter- 
form  into  families, — Caslon,  Cheltenham,  Jenson,  Ronaldson,  etc., — 
and  to  speak  of  each  family  or  typical  variant  from  the  common  letter- 
form  as  a  '  face.' 


247891 


2  ROETHLEIN 

At  the  time  when  the  art  of  printing  from  individual  or 
moveable  types  was  first  introduced,  the  forms  of  the  letters 
of  the  alphabet  were  few  in  number  and  exceedingly  crude 
in  design.  The  use  of  'black  letter'  had  been  popularized  by 
generations  of  manuscript  writers ;  and  the  early  printers 
were  content  to  appropriate  those  letter-forms  which  they 
found  to  be  in  current  use.  But  within  a  few  decades 
designers  and  draughtsmen  set  themselves  the  task  of  simpli- 
fying and  improving  the  existing  forms  of  letters ;  and,  indeed, 
it  seems  probable  that  the  Roman  'faces'  were  introduced 
about  the  year  1465,  and  the  Italic  'faces'  some  thirty-five 
years  later.  The  ingenuity  of  many  generations  of  mediaeval 
and  modem  designers  has  produced  a  multitude  of  variants 
of  letter- forms,  many  of  which  are  familiar  to  every  reader 
(a,  a,  a,  a,  a;  g,  g,  g,  g,  g).  Hundreds  of  different  'faces' 
of  type  have  been  designed  and  ptit  upon  the  market;  and 
while  it  is  true  that  certain  of  these  'faces'  are  employed 
only  for  purposes  of  ornamentation  and  display,  yet  an  enor- 
mous variety  of  letter-forms  is  to  be  found  in  our  books  and 
magazines.  Every  reader  has  observed  that  all  of  these 
variants  of  letter-form  are  not  equally  legible — an  obser- 
vation which  raises  the  theoretical  question:  What  are  the 
factors  upon  which  legibility  depends?  And  the  practical 
question :  How  should  one  proceed  if  one  set  out  to  improve 
the  legibility  of  printed  letters? 

II.    HISTORICAL 

Psychologists  have  been  engaged  these  many  years  in  an 
investigation  of  the  act  of  reading  in  its  various  aspects.  But 
there  is  a  singular  dearth  in  the  literature  so  far  as  the 
specific  topic  of  the  present  investigation  is  concerned. 

More  than  forty  years  ago,  Exner  (17)  and  Baxt  (2) 
undertook  to  measure  the  brief  period  of  time  which  is 
necessary  for  the  perception  of  visual  objects  (letters,  words)  ; 
and  in  1885  Cattell  (6,  7,  8)  continued  the  investigation 
of  the  same  problem.  Baxt  had  reported  that,  under  his 
most  favorable  conditions  of  illumination,  it  was  possible  to 
read  two  or  three  letters  of  a  total  group  of  seven  when 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES  3 

they  were  exposed  for  one  one-hundredth  of  a  second. 
Cattell  devised  a  falHng-screen  apparatus  which  enabled  him 
to  vary  and  to  measure  his  exposure-times.  He  found  that 
the  differences  in  the  times  which  are  necessary  for  the 
recognition  of  isolated  letters,  whether  upper  case  or  lower 
case,^  whether  Latin  or  German,  are  of  negligible  magnitude. 
When  the  exposure-time  was  very  brief,  it  was  found  that  the 
letters  were  not  always  read  correctly.  A  record  of  the 
percentage  of  correct  readings  of  the  various  letters,  when 
presented  under  constant  and  uniform  conditions,  enabled 
Cattell  to  determine  the  relative  legibility  of  the  letters. 
The  order  of  legibility  (descending)  was  found  to  be: 
WZMDHKNXAYOGLQISCTRPBVFUJE 
and  dkmqhbpwuljtvzrofnaxyeigc  s, — W  being 
read  correctly  in  89  per  cent,  of  the  trials,  E  in  23  per 
cent. ;  d  in  87,  and  s  in  28  per  cent. 

Sanford  (35)  employed  a  similar  method,  but  obtained  a 
somewhat  different  result;  his  order  was  (for  Snellen  type, 
lower  case)  : 

mwdqvyjp        kfblighgrxt        ouanescz 

Sanford  also  determined  the  relative  legibility  of  the  same 
letters  by  a  distance  method,  and  obtained  the  following 
result : 

wmqpvyjf  hrdgkbxlnu  atizocse 

Sanford  also  tested  alphabets  representing  two  other  letter- 
forms, — a  modern  face,  and  a  bold  oldstyle  face.  The  modern 
face  letters  were  recognized  in  the  following  order  (distance 
test)  : 

dpqmyknw  ogvxhbjlia  tuzrscfe 

The  oldstyle  letters  fell  into  the  following  order  (tested 
by  the  method  of  brief  exposure)  : 

mwpqvykb  djrlonighu  atfsxzce 

Finzi  (18)  employed  the  method  of  brief  exposure,  pre- 
senting  a   group   of   nine   letters   at   each   exposure.     From 

'  The  term  '  upper  case  '  will  be  used  throughout  to  designate  the 
capital  letters,  and  '  lower  case '  to  designate  the  small  letters. 


4  ROETHLEIN 

the  percentage  of  misreadings  of  each  letter  he  computed 
the  order  of  legibility  as  follows : 

P  U  A  Q  X  T  D  S  E  W  AI  V  Y  Z  H  C  N  F  L  R  G  B  K  O  I, 
the  percentage  of  errors  ranging  between  .8  for  P,  and  7.8 
for  I.  The  particular  type  or  letter-form  which  Finzi  em- 
ployed is  not  specified  in  his  paper. 

Griffing  and  Franz  (21)  investigated  the  influence  of  size 
and  form  of  letter  upon  legibility.  Their  experiments  com- 
prised a  fourfold  test :  What  is  the  difference  in  the  rapidity 
with  which  small  print  and  large  print  can  be  read  (five- 
point  and  tw^elve-point,  both  Roman)  ?  How  many  letters 
of  each  of  these  two  sizes  can  be  read  in  a  single  brief 
exp:  sure?  How  long  must  letters  of  each  size  be  exposed 
in  order  to  insure  their  correct  reading?  What  intensity  of 
illumination  is  necessary  for  the  recognition  of  letters  of 
various  forms  and  sizes, — Roman  letters,  .8  mm.  and  1.6  mm. 
high;  Gothic  letters,  .9,  1.6,  3.1,  and  6.0  mm.  high?  These 
investigators  found  that  their  larger  types  were,  in  every 
instance,  more  legible  than  their  sm.aller  types ;  and  that 
Gothic  letters  were  m.ore  legible  than  Roman  letters. 

Besides  these  experiments  which  have  just  been  described, 
numerous  attempts  have  been  made  to  investigate  other  factors 
which  have  to  do  with  the  act  of  reading.  The  nature  and 
the  extent  of  the  eye-movements  by  means  of  which  the  reader 
follow^s  the  printed  line  have  been  examined  and  measured 
by  Huey  (22,  23,  24),  Dodge  (13,  14,  15),  Erdmann  and 
Dodge  (16),  Dearborn  (10),  and  others.  It  has  been  estab- 
lished that  the  movement  of  the  reader's  eyes  does  not  pro- 
ceed gradually  and  continuously  across  the  page,  in  any 
such  fashion  as,  for  example,  a  meteor  moves  across  the 
sky.  Typical  eye-movements  consist  of  a  succession  of 
alternate  leaps  and  pauses ;  nor  is  the  movement  always  in 
a  forward  direction,  because  it  frequently  happens  that  one's 
eye-movement  proceeds  backward,  i.e.,  to  the  left,  from 
an  intermediate  fixation-point.  The  number  of  pauses  may 
vary  from  two  to  seven  in  a  line  whose  length  is  twenty 
centimeters ;  but  the  usual  distance  between  successive  fix- 
ation  points   or  pauses   is   approximately   2   cm.      It   seems 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES  $ 

probable  that  no  words  are  seen  while  the  eyes  are  in  move- 
ment; and  that  the  act  of  reading  a  printed  line  consists  of  a 
series  of  interrupted  glimpses,  during  each  of  which  one 
reads  a  small  section  which  extends  to  the  right  and  to  the 
left  of  the  fixation-point. 

This  discovery  makes  it  seem  probable  that  a  considerable 
part  of  the  printed  line  is  imaged,  not  upon  the  fovea,  but  upon 
para-foveal  regions  of  the  retina.  And  the  capacity  of  these 
paracentral  regions  to  distinguish  the  forms  of  letters  be- 
comes an  important  topic  for  investigation.  This  problem 
has,  indeed,  been  attacked  by  Kirschmann  (28)  and  by 
Dockeray  (12)  ;  but  further  investigation  is  needed  before 
one  can  make  any  definite  statement  regarding  the  legibility 
of  letters  in  indirect  vision. 

Numerous  other  investigations  of  the  problems  of  reading 
have  been  made  by  Babbage  (i),  Becher  (4),  Goldscheider 
and  Miiller  (19),  Javal  (26,  27),  Maire  (31),  Messmer  (32), 
Pillsbury  (33),  Quantz  (34),  Schumann  (t,/),  and  Zeitler 
(40)  ;  but  it  seems  more  appropriate  to  discuss  their  results 
in  connection  with  our  own  findings,  than  to  summarize  them 
in  this  section. 

III.     EXPERIMENTAL 

A.      ISOLATED    LETTERS 

a.  Materials  and  Apparatus 

The  materials  which  were  employed  in  the  present  in- 
vestigation were  sheets  of  printed  letters ;  and  the  apparatus 
consisted  of  a  mechanism  by  means  of  which  these  letters 
could  be  presented  at  a  variable  distance  from  the  observer. 

When  the  investigation  was  first  undertaken,  we  made 
a  careful  examination  of  the  various  faces  of  type  which  are 
listed  in  the  sample-books  of  the  American  Type  Founders 
Company.^       We   selected    fifty    faces   of   type, — comprising 


'  The  author  is  indebted  to  the  American  Typefounders  Company, 
Jersey  City,  for  a  liberal  donation  of  types  and  of  prints,  without 
which  the  investigation  would  have  been  impossible.  Especial  thanks 
are  due  to  Messrs.  Frank  B.  Berry,  L.  B.  Benton  and  Morris  Benton 
of    that    firm    for    valuable    suggestions    regarding    letter-forms    and 


6  ROETHLEIN 

some  thirty  ordinary  faces,  together  with  such  variants  as 
italic,  bold,  condensed,  expanded  and  various  combinations 
of  these  variants. 

In  these  earlier  experiments,  it  was  decided  to  employ  the 
method  of  brief  exposure;  and  an  apparatus  was  devised 
which  provided  for  a  succession  of  exposures,  each  one  one- 
thousandth  of  a  second  in  duration.  The  series  of  exposures 
of  any  given  letter  was  terminated  by  the  depression  of  a 
key  by  the  observer;  and  an  automatic  counting  device  re- 
corded the  number  of  exposures  which  had  been  necessary 
for  the  reading  of  the  letter.  For  certain  technical  reasons 
this  apparatus  and  mode  of  procedure  were  abandoned  after 
a  number  of  preliminary  experiments  had  been  made;  and 
the  distance  test  was  substituted.* 

The  apparatus,  by  means  of  which  we  obtained  the  results 
on  which  this  paper  is  based,  consisted  of  a  long  bench  along 
which  moved  a  sliding  carriage  containing  the  letters  to  be 
read.  The  bench  was  440  cm.  long  and  15  cm.  wide.  Its 
proximal  end  was  78  cm.,  and  its  distal  end  63  cm.  above 
the  floor,  so  that  the  observer  was  able  to  assume  the  primary 
position  of  regard  throughout.  The  higher  end  of  the  bench 
was  provided  with  a  vertical  support,  which  carried  a  head 
rest, — the  hood  of  a  stereoscope.  This  device  enabled  the 
observer  to  assume  and  to  maintain  a  constant  position  in 
relation  to  any  point  on  the  scale  upon  the  side  of  the  bench. 

regarding  the  interpretation  of  our  results.  We  are  also  under  obli- 
gation to  Dr.  H.  L.  Koopman,  of  Brown  University,  and  to  Mr. 
C.  Chester  Lane  of  the  Harvard  Press;  Mr.  L.  D.  Evans  of  the  River- 
side Press,  Cambridge,  Mass.,  has  furnished  us  with  valuable  data 
concerning  compositors'  errors  and  proof-readers'  errors. 

*  It  is  a  well-known  fact  that  concentration  of  attention  has  a  very 
pronounced  efifect  upon  reaction-time,  and  that  the  duration  of  the 
reaction  varies  with  variations  in  degree  of  concentration.  It  seemed 
difficult,  even  impossible,  to  maintain  the  same  degree  of  concen- 
tration through  thousands  of  readings  of  letters ;  and,  in  the  absence 
of  a  control  of  this  exceedingly  influential  factor,  the  results  of  our 
tachistoscopic  experiments  seemed  wholly  unreliable.  For  this  reason 
the  tachistoscope  was  abandoned,  and  a  method  which  consisted  in  pre- 
senting the  letters  at  variable  distances  was  substituted. 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING   TYPES  7 

The  carriage  which  moved  along  the  bench  consisted 
of  a  box  55  cm.  high,  40  cm.  wide,  and  25  cm.  deep. 
The  front  of  the  box  had  been  cut  away ;  and  the  back 
consisted  of  a  wooden  wall  against  which  the  sheet  of 
printed  letters  was  attached  and  held  in  place  by  a 
sheet  of  glass.  The  back  wall  of  the  box  was  illuminated 
by  a  number  of  electric  lamps,  so  arranged  that  the  whole 
surface  of  the  sheet  of  letters  was  uniformly  illuminated. 
To  the  side  of  the  carriage  was  attached  an  indicator,  which 
just  cleared  a  metric  scale  upon  the  side  of  the  bench ;  this 
device  enabled  the  experimenter  to  ascertain  the  distance  of 
the  sheet  of  letters  from  the  eye  of  the  observer  at  any  given 
setting  of  the  carriage. 

The  sheets  upon  which  the  isolated  letters  were  printed 
were  21  cm.  wide  and  36  cm.  long;  and  the  paper  of  all 
of  the  sheets  was  of  the  same  quality  and  texture.^  Each 
sheet  contained  twenty-eight  letters,  all  of  the  same  face 
and  of  the  same  case, — the  complete  alphabet,  with  two  of 
its  letters  repeated.  The  letters  were  arranged  in  random 
sequence,  in  four  lines ;  they  were  so  spaced  that  each  letter 
stood  at  a  distance  of  3.7  cm.  from  its  nearest  neighbors 
on  the  same  and  on  adjacent  lines.  Fifty-two  different 
sheets  of  letters  were  investigated,  representing  the  following 
twenty-six  faces  of  type,  both  lower  case  and  upper  case. 
All  of  our  letters  were  of  the  size  which  is  technically 
described  as  ten-point ;  the  reader  will  find  them  illustrated 
in  Tables  I  and  II.     (See  inserts  between  pages  8  and  9.) 

American  Typewriter 
Bold  Antique 
Bulfinch 

Caslon  Oldstyle  No.  540 
Century  Oldstyle 
Century  Oldstyle,  Bold 
Century  Expanded 
Cheltenham  Oldstyle 

"  This  paper  is  technically  described  by  the  manufacturers  as  a  white, 
coated  book-paper,  25  x  30  —  80. 


a  ROETHLEIN 

Cheltenham  Bold 

Cheltenham  Bold,  Condensed 

Cheltenham  Italic 

Cheltenham  Wide 

Clearface 

Clearface  Bold 

Clearface  Italic 

Clearface  Bold   Italic 

Cushing  No.  2 

Cushing  Oldstyle  No.  2 

Cushing  Monotone 

Delia  Robbia 

DeVinne  No.  2 

DeVinne  No.  2,  Italic 

Franklin  Gothic 

Jenson  Oldstyle  No.  2 

News  Gothic 

Ronaldson  Oldstyle  No.  551 

b.  Method  of  Procedure 

All  of  the  readings  were  made  in  a  semi-darkened  room, 
in  order  that  the  (artificial)  illumination  upon  the  sheet  of 
letters  might  be  controlled  and  kept  constant  throughout. 
The  experimental  procedure  was  as  follows :  After  the 
observer  had  become  adapted  to  the  illumination  of  the  room, 
a  sheet  of  letters  was  placed  in  position  in  the  carriage  and 
the  series  of  readings  began  with  the  carriage  at  the  farther 
end  of  the  bench.  The  observer  had  been  instructed  to  read 
the  letters  at  a  uniform  tempo,  substituting  "blank"  for  the 
name  of  any  letter  which  was  not  easily  decipherable.  This 
precaution  seemed  necessary  to  prevent  the  observer  from 
giving  an  undue  amount  of  attention  to  any  one  letter  of  the 
series  at  the  expense  of  the  other  letters,  i.  e.,  to  prevent  him 
from  puzzling  longer  over  one  member  of  the  series  than 
over  any  other  member.  After  he  had  thus  attempted  to 
read  through  the  complete  list  of  letters,  the  carriage  was 
moved  to  a  point  twenty  centimeters  nearer  his  eye  than 
the  initial  setting;    and  he  made  a  second  attempt  to  read 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES  9 

the  letters.  In  the  first  and  alternate  readings  of  each  series 
he  began  at  the  upper  left-hand  corner  of  the  sheet  and 
proceeded  from  left  to  right  along  each  line,  taking  the  lines, 
in  order,  from  the  top  downward.  In  the  second  and  alter- 
nate readings,  he  began  at  the  lower  right-hand  corner  of 
the  sheet  and  proceeded  from  right  to  left,  and  from  below 
upwards.  This  procedure  was  continued,  the  carriage  being 
advanced  step  by  step,  until  every  letter  upon  the  sheet 
had  been  identified.  The  experimenter  was  provided  with 
a  duplicate  sheet  of  letters,  similar  to  the  one  which  had 
been  inserted  in  the  carriage ;  and  upon  this  duplicate  sheet 
she  recorded  the  misreadings,  and  the  farthest  distance  at 
which  each  letter  was  read. 

Each  of  the  fifty-two  sheets  of  letters  was  read  twice 
by  each  of  the  six  observers.  Before  being  inserted  in  the 
carriage  for  its  second  reading,  each  sheet  was  cut  along 
its  longitudinal  and  its  transverse  diameters ;  and  the  four 
quarter-sheets  v/ere  reassembled  in  such  fashion  that  those 
letters  which  had  formerly  appeared  upon  the  marginal  regions 
of  the  original  sheet  now  appeared  upon  central  regions  of 
the  reconstructed  sheet,  and  vice  versa.  A  period  of  several 
days  always  elapsed  between  the  first  and  the  second  reading 
of  any  sheet. 

c.  Observers 

The  observers  were  instructors  or  students  in  the  depart- 
ment: Messrs.  R.  Acher,  J.  W.  Baird,  E.  O.  Finkenbinder, 
F.  A.  Lombard,  H.  B.  Moyle,  and  C.  W.  St.  John ;  they  all 
possessed  emmetropic  or  adequately  corrected  vision.  Each 
observer  gave  a  complete  series  of  one  hundred  and  four 
readings. 

B.      GROUPED    LETTERS 

In  the  second  group  of  experiments  the  apparatus  and 
the  method  remained  unchanged,  but  here  the  letters  were 
presented  in  groups  instead  of  singly.  In  these  later  experi- 
ments only  lower  case  letters  were  employed.  Eight  faces 
were   elected   from   the  twenty-six  which   had  already  been 


lO  ROETHLEIN 

used,   and  Scotch  Roman  was  added, — the  complete  list  of 
nine  faces  being  as  follows : 

Bulfinch 

Caslon  Oldstyle  No.  540 
Century  Oldstyle 
Century  Expanded 
Cheltenham  Wide 
Cushing-  Oldstyle  No.  2 
Cushing  A-Ionotone 
News  Gothic 
Scotch  Roman 

Each  group  of  letters  formed  a  nonsense  combination; 
and  the  groups  of  each  face  were  arranged  in  three  lines 
upon  sheets  of  the  same  size  as  had  been  employed  in  the 
former  experiments.  Sets  of  grouped  letters  were  printed, 
in  duplicate,  upon  coated  book  paper,  of  the  good  quality 
and  upon  an  antique  laid  book  paper  of  the  same  quality 
and  weight  as  the  paper  of  this  page. 

Our  mode  of  grouping  the  letters  aimed  to  introduce  as 
many  difficult  and  confusing  combinations  of  letters  as  pos- 
sible. We  were  guided  in  the  combining  of  the  letters  into 
groups  by  data  furnished  by  Mr.  L.  D.  Evans,  an  expert 
proofreader,  and  by  the  confusions  which  had  been  recorded 
in  our  earlier  experiments.  The  combinations  of  letters  which 
are  here  appended  illustrate  a  typical  series  of  groups ;  they 
also  illustrate  the  Scotch  Roman  face. 

ksitugy  cdzxpbj  ftoceygqa  wrvlindh 
hknurfkxzqg  munimm  bhwvjyst  oceo 
wvxarlizxp  ybhdonactilsf  dnupqcetrlj 

Only  three  observers,  Messrs.  Baird,  Finkenbinder  and 
St.  John,  took  part  in  these  experiments.  Each  observer 
gave  two  readings  of  each  face, — an  average  of  twenty-four 
readings  of  each  letter  of  each  face. 


TABLE  I.     UPPER  CASE.     ISOLATED  LETTERS 

Showing  the  Average  Distance,  Expressed  in  Cm.,  at  Which  Each  Letter  op  Each  Face  was  Read  (Twelve  Readings,  Six  Observers).     The  First  Column  in  Each  Division  of  the  Table  Shows  the  Actual  Size  and  Form  op  the 

Letter  Which  was  Presented  for  Identification;  and  the  Number  Indicates  the  Average  Distance,  from  the  Eye,  at  Which  the  Letter  was  Correctly  Identified 


American 
Typewriter 

Bulfinch 

Caslon  0.  S. 

Century  0.  S. 

Century 
Expanded 

Cheltenham 
O.S. 

Cheltenham 
Wide 

Clearface 

dishing  0.  S. 

Cushing  No.  2 

Cushing 
Monotone 

Delia  Robbia 

De  Vinne 
No.  2 

Jenson  0.  S. 

News  Gothic 

Roualdson 
O.S. 

Average 

A 

221.7 

A 

280 

A 

270 

A 

300 

A 

300 

A 

291.7 

A 

281.9 

A 

257.5 

A 

241.7 

A 

234.2 

A 

293.3 

A 

265 

A 

300 

A 

286.7 

A 

263.3 

272  A 

B 

176.7 

B 

231.7 

B 

206.7 

B 

221.7 

B 

213.3 

B 

210 

B 

221.7 

B 

204.2 

B 

190.8 

B 

179.2 

B 

211.7 

B 

211.7 

B 

229.2 

B 

230.8 

B 

195 

208.9 

C 

195 

c 

283.3 

C 

278.3 

C 

285 

C 

271.2 

C 

290 

C 

288.8 

C 

259.1 

C 

243.3 

C 

251.7 

C 

282. 5 

C 

252.5 

C 

310 

C 

276.7 

C 

259.2 

265.1 

D 

1S3.3 

D 

275 

D 

265 

D 

281.7 

D 

273.3 

D 

270 

D 

251.7 

D 

255.8 

D 

218.3 

D 

236.7 

D 

243.3 

D 

249.2 

D 

300 

D 

265 

D 

246.7 

254.3 

E 

193.3 

E. 

230.8 

E 

213.3 

E 

241.7 

E 

240.8 

E 

259.2 

s^H 

E 

229.6 

E 

198.3 

E 

209.2 

E 

192.5 

E 

228.3 

E 

226.7 

E 

245.  S 

E 

240 

E 

208.3 

223.9 

F 

191.7 

F 

254.2 

F 

210.8 

F 

265 

F 

265.8 

F 

241.7 

I5 

F 

270.7 

F 

234.2 

F 

208.3 

F 

217.5 

F 

244.2 

F 

243.3 

F 

276.7 

F 

253.3 

F 

241.7 

241.6 

G 

169.2 

G 

276.7 

G 

256.7 

G 

265 

G 

255 

G 

275 

0^ 

G 

258.6 

G 

220 

G 

197.5 

G 

214.2 

G 

256.7 

Q 

1S4.2 

G 

273.3 

G 

247.5 

G 

213.3 

237.6 

H 

190 

H 

266.7 

H 

230 

H 

250 

H 

239.2 

H 

256.7 

H 

261.2 

H 

213.3 

H 

202.5 

H 

214.2 

H 

283.3 

H 

233.3 

H 

273.3 

H 

253.3 

H 

240 

240.5 

I 

230 

1 

300 

I 

285 

I 

295 

I 

275 

I 

268.3 

I 

327.2 

I 

290 

1 

244.2 

I 

251.7 

1 

301.7 

I 

273.3 

I 

296.7 

1 

296.7 

I 

270 

280.4 

J 

226.7 

J 

290 

J 

285 

J 

300 

J 

301.7 

J 

[281.7 

P 

J 

323 

J 

295 

J 

271.7 

J 

260 

J 

315 

J 

275.0 

J 

320 

J 

295 

J 

281.7 

287.5 

K 

177.5 

K 

262.5 

K 

220.8 

K 

256,7 

K 

241.7 

K 

254.2 

S  5- 

K 

236 

K 

228.3 

K 

205.8 

K 

200 

K 

217.5 

K 

243.3 

K 

270 

K 

231.7 

K 

229.2 

231.7 

L 

248.3 

L 

305 

L 

281.7 

L 

308.3 

L 

301.7 

L 

300 

sa 

L 

315.1 

L 

296.7 

L 

261.7 

L 

266.7 

L 

296.7 

L 

290 

L 

311.7 

L 

300 

L 

283.3 

291.1 

M 

189.2 

M 

316.7 

M 

290 

M 

313,3 

M 

298.3 

M 

303.3 

Oo 

M 

323 

M 

315 

M 

273,3 

M 

275 

M 

321.8 

M 

293.3 

M 

318,3 

M 

308.3 

M 

268.3 

293.8 

N 

184.2 

N 

246.7 

N 

244.2 

N 

258.3 

N 

241.7 

N 

261.7 

r^^O 

N 

247 

N 

221.7 

N 

201.7 

N 

215 

N 

258.3 

N 

225 

N 

270 

N 

243.3 

N 

225 

235.5 

0 

186.7 

O 

293.3 

O 

267.5 

0 

293.3 

0 

265 

O 

278.3 

0 

274.5 

0 

230.8 

0 

215.8 

0 

219.2 

0 

275 

0 

226.7 

0 

296.7 

0 

250 

0 

253.3 

254.0 

P 

190 

P 

301.7 

P 

245 

P 

263.3 

P 

281.7 

P 

270.8 

^    c?" 

P 

286 

P 

255 

P 

238.3 

P 

229.2 

P 

252.5 

P 

263.3 

P 

296.7 

P 

278.3 

P 

229.2 

257.9 

ft 

214.2 

Q 

308 . 3 

Q 

270 

Q 

268,3 

Q 

275 

Q 

291.7 

0 

Q 

285 

Q 

255.8 

Q 

220 

Q 

245 

Q 

246.7 

Q 

240.9 

Q 

295 

Q 

278.3 

Q 

231.7 

261.7 

R 

186.7 

R 

227.5 

R 

200.8 

R 

210.7 

R 

235 

R 

255 

~ 

R 

216.9 

R 

198.3 

R 

196.7 

R 

180 

R 

228.3 

R 

193.3 

R 

234.2 

p 

240 

R 

205.8 

214.0 

S 

168.3 

5 

236.7 

S 

197.5 

S 

225 

S 

209.2 

S 

215 

^ 

S 

211.2 

S 

210 

S 

182.5 

S 

183.3 

S 

203.3 

S 

200 

S 

223.3 

s 

216.7 

S 

203.3 

205.7 

T 

220.8 

T 

276.7 

T 

280 

T 

305 

T 

280 

T 

271.2 

I' 

T 

273.9 

T 

280 

T 

219.2 

T 

237.5 

T 

295 

T 

251.7 

T 

308.3 

T 

280.8 

T 

251.7 

268.9 

U 

200.8 

U 

268.3 

U 

247.5 

U 

256  7 

U 

276.7 

U 

266.7 

3 

U 

269.1 

U 

233.3 

U 

220 

U 

232.5 

U 

275 

U 

240.9 

U 

270.8 

U 

273.3 

U 

237.5 

251.3 

V 

205 

V 

275 

V 

255.8 

V 

281.7 

V 

278.3 

V 

2SS.3 

V 

277.6 

V 

246.7 

V 

237.5 

V 

236.7 

V 

291.7 

V 

248.3 

V 

310 

V 

264.2 

V 

256.7 

263.5 

w 

165 

w 

310.7 

W 

291.7 

w 

306.7 

w 

316.7 

W 

306.7 

«) 

w 

318.2 

W 

331.7 

W 

288.3 

W 

285 

w 

343,3 

w 

315 

W 

306.7 

w 

316.7 

w 

301.7 

300.2 

X 

192.0 

X 

260.8 

X 

237.5 

X 

257.5 

X 

250 

X 

263.3 

?• 

X 

247 

X 

240 

X 

212.5 

X 

222.6 

X 

252.5 

X 

236.7 

X 

256.7 

X 

240 

X 

228.3 

239.8 

y 

221.7 

Y 

268.3 

Y 

260 

Y 

271.7 

Y 

261.7 

Y 

249.2 

c_ 

Y 

266 

Y 

250 

Y 

241.7 

Y 

233.3 

Y 

263.3 

Y 

225 

Y 

261.7 

Y 

258.3 

Y 

250.8 

252.1 

z 

187.5 

z 

261.7 

Z 

228.3 

Z 

250 

Z 

237.5 

Z 

261.7 

Z 

240.7 

Z 

218.3 

Z 

204.2 

Z 

207.5 

z 

256.7 

Z 

216.7 

Z 

270 

Z 

255.8 

Z 

210.7 

233.8 

Average  IQQ. 8 

273.8 

250.7 

270.4 

264.8 

268.5 

269.3 

247.6 

224.8 

228.4 

266.8 

243,2 

281.7 

264.6 

241.7 

252.8 

LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        II 

d.  Results 

A.      ISOLATED   LETTERS 

The  experimenter's  record-sheet  contained  a  statement  of 
the  distance  at  which  each  letter  was  read,  together  with  a 
list  of  the  confusions  or  misreadings,  and  an  introspective 
description  of  the  procedure  which  the  observer  had  followed 
in  deciphering  the  letters.  The  numerical  data  have  been 
compiled  and  tabulated  in  various  ways. 

Tables  I  and  II  show  the  averages  of  the  numerical  results, 
arranged  in  order  of  faces.  These  two  tables  report  the 
data  for  'ordinary'  faces  only, — the  italic,  the  bold  and  the 
condensed  faces  not  being  included  here.  The  numbers  which 
appear  in  these  tables  indicate  the  averages  of  the  extreme 
distances  at  which  the  letters  were  read, — hence  the  larger 
the  number  appended  to  any  letter,  the  greater  the  legibility 
of  that  letter.  Thus,  in  the  first  column  of  Table  I,  "H  190, 
I  230"  may  be  taken  to  signify  that  the  upper  case  I  of  the 
American  Typewriter  face  is  considerably  more  legible  than 
the  upper  case  H  of  the  same  face. 

Each  vertical  column  of  these  two  tables  contains,  there- 
fore, a  statement  of  our  findings  regarding  the  relative  legi- 
bility of  the  various  letters  of  a  given  face;  and  the  number 
at  the  foot  of  the  column  indicates  the  average  legibility 
of  the  twenty-six  letters  of  that  face.  The  numbers  in  each 
horizontal  line  of  the  tables  indicate  the  relative  legibility 
of  each  of  the  sixteen  variants  of  each  of  the  twenty-six 
letter   forms. 

Table  III  presents  the  grand  averages  of  the  sixteen  faces; 
it  also  contains  similar  data  for  the  bold  and  for  the  italic 
faces  and  for  two  extra-bold  faces,  Franklin  Gothic  and 
Bold  Antique ;  while  Table  IV  shows  the  grand  average 
distance  at  which  each  letter  of  the  alphabet  was  read,  the 
data  being  here  compiled  from  the  readings  of  the  complete 
set  of  sixteen  faces. 

The  efifect  of  certain  definite  modifications  of  a  given  letter- 
form  is  shown  in  Tables  V  and  VI.  These  two  tables  are  com- 
piled from  results  which  were  obtained  with  Cheltenham  Old- 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        II 

d.  Results 

A.      ISOLATED   LETTERS 

The  experimenter's  record-sheet  contained  a  statement  of 
the  distance  at  which  each  letter  was  read,  together  with  a 
list  of  the  confusions  or  misreadings,  and  an  introspective 
description  of  the  procedure  which  the  observer  had  followed 
in  deciphering  the  letters.  The  numerical  data  have  been 
compiled  and  tabulated  in  various  ways. 

Tables  I  and  II  show  the  averages  of  the  numerical  results, 
arranged  in  order  of  faces.  These  two  tables  report  the 
data  for  'ordinary'  faces  only, — the  italic,  the  bold  and  the 
condensed  faces  not  being  included  here.  The  numbers  which 
appear  in  these  tables  indicate  the  averages  of  the  extreme 
distances  at  which  the  letters  were  read, — hence  the  larger 
the  number  appended  to  any  letter,  the  greater  the  legibility 
of  that  letter.  Thus,  in  the  first  column  of  Table  I,  "H  190, 
I  230"  may  be  taken  to  signify  that  the  upper  case  I  of  the 
American  Typewriter  face  is  considerably  more  legible  than 
the  upper  case  H  of  the  same  face. 

Each  vertical  column  of  these  two  tables  contains,  there- 
fore, a  statement  of  our  findings  regarding  the  relative  legi- 
bility of  the  various  letters  of  a  given  face;  and  the  number 
at  the  foot  of  the  column  indicates  the  average  legibility 
of  the  twenty-six  letters  of  that  face.  The  numbers  in  each 
horizontal  line  of  the  tables  indicate  the  relative  legibility 
of  each  of  the  sixteen  variants  of  esch  of  the  twenty-six 
letter  forms. 

Table  III  presents  the  grand  averages  of  the  sixteen  faces ; 
it  also  contains  similar  data  for  the  bold  and  for  the  italic 
faces  and  for  two  extra-bold  faces,  Franklin  Gothic  and 
Bold  Antique ;  while  Table  IV  shows  the  grand  average 
distance  at  which  each  letter  of  the  alphabet  was  read,  the 
data  being  here  compiled  from  the  readings  of  the  complete 
set  of  sixteen  faces. 

The  effect  of  certain  definite  modifications  of  a  given  letter- 
form  is  shown  in  Tables  V  and  VI.  These  two  tables  are  com- 
piled from  results  which  were  obtained  with  Cheltenham  Old- 


12  ROETHLEIN 

style  presented  in  ordinary,  in  bold,  in  bold-condensed,    (in 
wide,)  and  in  italicized  form. 

Tables  VII,  VIII,  IX,  and  X  show  the  five  variants  of  each 
letter  which  proved  to  be  most  legible,  and  the  five  which 
proved  to  be  least  legible. 

B.      GROUPED  LETTERS 

The  results  of  our  second  series  of  experiments  are  pre- 
sented in  Tables  XI  and  XII.  Table  XI  shows  the  average 
distance  at  which  each  letter  of  each  of  the  nine  faces  was 
read  when  presented  in  groups.  The  reader  is  warned  against 
drawing  any  conclusion  from  this  table  regarding  the  relative 
legibility  of  the  various  letters  of  any  given  face,  e.g., 
regarding  the  relative  legibility  of  the  Caslon  m  and  the 
Caslon,  or  any  other,  k.  In  other  words,  the  numbers  v/hich 
appear  in  the  horizontal  lines  are  comparable  with  one  an- 
other; but  the  numbers  which  appear  in  the  vertical  columns 
are  incomparable  with  one  another.  Table  XII  presents 
the  same  results  as  are  contained  in  Table  XI,  but  they  are 
now  arranged  in  order  of  magnitude  in  order  to  show  the 
(descending)  order  of  legibility  of  the  several  variants  of 
each  letter-form. 

IV.    DISCUSSION  OF  RESULTS 

A.      ISOLATED   LETTERS 

The  problem  with  which  we  are  here  concerned  may  be 
given  the  following  general  formulation :  Which  of  several 
geometrical  figures  is  most  clearly  perceptible,  and  most 
readily  distinguishable  from  other  geometrical  figures?  But 
while  the  twenty-six  letter-forms  which  constitute  the  alpha- 
bet may  be  regarded  as  a  series  of  geometrical  figures  of 
dififerent  shapes  and  of  different  degrees  of  complexity  of 
detail,  and  while  any  twenty-five  of  the  different  twenty-six 
different  faces  of  type  which  were  employed  in  the  present 
investigation  may  be  regarded  as  variants  from  the  twenty- 
sixth  or  common  letter-form,  yet,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  such 
a  simple  mode  of  envisagement  of  our  problem  does  not  do 
justice   to   the   complex    conditions   which   are    found    to   be 


N  IN  Each  Division  op  the  Table  Shows  the  Actual  Size  and  Form  of  the 
ICH  THE  Letter  was  Correctly  Identified 


a  Robbia 

De  Vinne 
No.  2 

Jenson  0.  S. 

News  Gothic 

Ronaldson 
0.  S. 

Average 

157.5 

a 

174.2 

a 

183.3 

a 

190 

a 

169.2 

177.0 

223.3 

b 

195.8 

b 

220 

b 

245 

b 

219.2 

217.8 

181.7 

c 

182.5 

c 

197.5 

c 

221.7 

c 

190.8 

193.8 

276.7 

d 

253.3 

6 

246.7 

d 

256.7 

d 

245 

254.3 

175 

e 

170 

^ 

191.7 

e 

191.7 

e 

165 

173.5 

260 

f 

205 

f 

225 

f 

263.3 

f 

235 

233.0 

218.3 

g 

196.7 

g 

202.5 

g 

258.3 

g 

198.3 

220.8 

236.7 

h 

205 

h 

220 

h 

235.8 

h. 

232.5 

222.7 

219.2 

i 

214.2 

i 

231.7 

i 

249.2 

i 

204.2 

224.1 

210.8 

1 

236.7 

210 

J 

280.8 

3 

247.5 

239.4 

206.7 

k 

215 

fc 

230 

k 

233.3 

k 

224.2 

216.9 

250 

1 

190.8 

I 

251.7 

1 

226.7 

1 

243.3 

236.3 

295 

m 

315 

m 

291.7 

m 

326.7 

m 

300 

296.8 

203.3 

n 

197.5 

n 

206.7 

n 

220 

n 

190 

195.7 

193.3 

o 

170.8 

o 

188.3 

0 

207.5 

o 

180 

190.1 

239.3 

p 

225 

P 

255 

p 

248.3 

P 

217.5 

236.1 

238.3 

q 

212.5 

q 

220.8 

q 

257.5 

q 

217.5 

226.4 

190 

r 

198.3 

r 

196.7 

r 

237.5 

r 

181.7 

203.6 

138.3 

s 

154.2 

s 

150 

s 

177.5 

s 

141.8 

152.6 

191.7 

t 

191.7 

t 

188.3 

t 

223.3 

t 

202.5 

199.6 

195 

u 

194.2 

« 

180 

u 

215 

u 

185.8 

193.1 

205.8 

V 

199.2 

V 

219.2 

V 

235.8 

V 

219.2 

213.1 

280 

w 

265 

w 

270 

w 

305 

w 

263.3 

261.6 

171.7 

X 

185 

X 

192.5 

X 

196.7 

X 

170 

181.7 

226.7 

y 

208.3 

y 

241.7 

y 

246.7 

y 

210 

224.6 

175 

z 

170 

z 

171.7 

z 

199.2 

z 

185 

171.6 

214.2 

204.8 

214.7 

236.4 

209.2 

213.7 

TABLE  II.     LOWER  CASE 


Showing  the  Average  Distance,  Expressed  in  Cm.,  at  Which  Each  Letter  of  Each  Face    was  Read  (Twelve  Readings,  Six  Ob,server8).     The  First  Column  in  Each  Division  of  the  Table  Shows  the  Actual  Size  and  Form  op  the 

Letter  Which  was  Presented  for  Identification;  and  the  Number  Indicates  the  Average  Distance,  From  the  Ete,  at  Which  the  Letter  was  Correctly  Identified 


American 
Typewriter 

Bulfineh 

Caslon  0.  S. 

Century  0.  S. 

Century 
Expanded 

Cheltenham 
0.  S. 

Cheltenham 
Wide 

Clearface 

Gushing  0.  S. 

Cashing  No.  2 

Cushing 
Monotone 

Delia  Robbia 

De  Vmne 
No.  2 

Jensen  0.  S. 

News  Gothic 

Ronaldson 
0.  S. 

Average 

a 

b 

0 

d 
e 

184.2 

208.3 

168.3 

230 

162.5 

a 

b 

c 

d' 

e 

185 

233.3 

207.5 

258.3 

181.7 

a 
b 
c 
d 
e 

170.8 

190 

185 

253.3 

165.8 

a 
b 
c 
d 
e 

197.5 

245 

230 

199.1 

a 
b 
c 
d 
e 

196.7 
233.3 

273.3 

187.5 

a 
b 
c 
d 
e 

155 

221.7 

180.8 

261.7 

169.2 

a 
b 
c 

d 

e 

190.8 

245 

200.8 

276.7 

185.8 

a 
b 
c 
d 
e 

182.1 

223 

235.9 

283.4 

179.8 

a 
b 
c 
d 
e 

173.3 

206.7 

179.2 

260 

164.2 

a 
b 
c 
d 
e 

155.8 
171.7 

174.2 
205.  S 
140 

a 
b 
c 
d 

e 

155.8 
203.3 
171.7 
233.3 
146.7 

a 
b 
c 
d 
e 

167.5 
223.3 
181.7 
276.7 
175 

a 
b 

c 
d 

e 

174.2 
195.8 
182.5 
253.3 
170 

a 
b 

c 
d 
e 

183.3 

220 

197.5 

246.7 

191.7 

a 
b 
c 
d 
e 

190 

245 

221.7 

256.7 

191.7 

a 
b 
c 
d 
e 

169.2 

219.2 

190.8 

245 

165 

177.0 
217.8 
193.8 
254.3 
173.5 

f 

g 
h 
i 
3 

241.7 
203.3 
207.5 
206.7 
256.7 

f 
i 

i 

261.7 
251.7 
241.7 
243.3 
228.3 

f 
S 
h 
i 
i 

225 

182.5 

210.8 

209.2 

235 

f 

r 

1 

i 
J 

256.7 

245 

235 

245 

240 

f 

g 

h 

1 

J 

256.7 
241.7 
238.3 
215.8 
283.3 

f 

I 
i 

i 

235 

195.8 

211.7 

235 

234.2 

i 

S 
h 

j 

241.7 
216.7 
238.3 
251.7 
248.3 

f 

i 
j 

241.7 

250 

247 

213 

264.4 

f 

e 

h 

i 
j 

232.5 
231.7 
211.7 
231.7 
227.5 

f 

g 
h 

i 
J 

184.2 

225.8 

190.8 

200 

218.3 

f 
g 
h 
i 

j 

178.3 

215 

200 

215 

208.3 

f 

i 
j 

260 

218.3 

236.7 

219.2 

210.8 

f 

g 
h 
i 

j 

205 

196.7 

205 

214.2 

236.7 

f 
i 

i 

225 

202.5 

220 

231.7 

210 

f 
g 
h 

j 

263.3 
258.3 
235.8 
249.2 
280.8 

f 

g 
h 
i 
j 

235 

198.3 

232.5 

204.2 

247.5 

233.0 

220.8 
222.7 
224.1 
239.4 

k 
1 
m 
n 

0 

188.3 

230 

195 

195.8 

188.3 

k 

1 

m 
n 
o 

236.7 
256.7 
336.7 
213.3 
220 

k 

1 

m 
n 

0 

197.5 

219.2 

291.7 

190 

180.8 

k 

1 

m 

n 

0 

240 

245 

310 

213.3 

211.7 

k 
1 

m 
n 

0 

235 

252.5 

286.7 

199.2 

213.3 

k 
1 

m 
n 
o 

211.7 

240 

295 

181.7 

181.7 

k 

1 

m 

n 

o 

224.2 

254.2 

315 

208.3 

189.2 

k 
1 

m 
n 

0 

223.2 
280.2 
325.1 
213.7 
199.5 

k 
1 

m 
n 

0 

221.7 
232.5 
315 
172.5 

172.5 

k 
1 

m 
n 

0 

183.3 
208.3 
273.3 
162.5 
170 

k 
1 

m 
n 

0 

200 

199.2 

276.7 

163.3 

175 

k 

1 

m 

n 

o 

206.7 

250 

295 

203.3 

193.3 

k 

1 

m 
n 
o 

215 

190.8 

315 

197.5 

170.8 

fc 
1 
m 

n 

0 

230 

251.7 

291.7 

206.7 

188.3 

k 

1 

m 

n 

0 

233.3 

226.7 

326.7 

220 

207.5 

k 
1 

m 
n 

0 

224.2 

243.3 

300 

190 

180 

216.9 
236.3 
296.8 
195.7 
190.1 

P 

q 

r 
s 
t 

238.3 
233.3 
210.8 
149.2 
198.3 

P 
q 

r 

s 
t 

271.7 

240 

216.7 

167.5 

230.8 

P 

q 

r 
s 
t 

220.8 

221.7 

203.3 

145 

180.8 

P 

q 

r 
s 
t 

240 

233.3 

216.7 

167.5 

206.7 

P 
q 
r 

s 
t 

240 

233.3 

225 

165 

221.7 

P 

q 

r 
s 
t 

223.3 

221.7 
187. 5 
138.3 
183.3 

P 

q 

r 
s 

t 

247.5 

219.2 

214.2 

160 

190 

P 

q 
r 
s 

t 

259.7 
234.4 
215.4 
150.4 
228 

P 

q 

r 
s 
t 

245 

235 

205 

145.8 

208.3 

P 

q 

r 
s 
t 

205 

196.7 

175.8 

145.8 

169.2 

P 

q 

r 
s 
t 

201.7 
206.7 
183.3 
145.5 
179.2 

P 

q 

r 
s 
t 

239.3 

238.3 

190 

138.3 

191.7 

P 

q 

r 
s 
t 

225 

212.5 

198.3 

154.2 

191.7 

P 

q 

t 

s 

t 

255 

220.8 

196.7 

150 

188.3 

P 

q 
r 
s 

t 

248.3 
257.5 
237.5 
177.5 
223.3 

P 

q 

r 
s 

t 

217.5 
217.5 
181.7 
141.8 
202.5 

236.1 
226.4 
203.6 
152.6 
199.6 

u 

V 

w 

y 

z 

198.3 

195 

183.3 

180.8 

230 

159 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 

z 

225 

240 

271.7 

211.7 

245 

196.7 

u 

V 

vv 

X 

y 

z 

185 

180.8 

243.3 

171.7 

221.7 

162.5 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 

z 

212.5 

230 

266.7 

200 

230.8 

182.5 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 

z 

198.3 

217.5 

268.3 

195 

218.3 

171.7 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 

z 

177.5 

205 

263.3 

169.2 

222.5 

164.2 

u 

V 
X 

y 

z 

197.5 
223.3 
293.3 
184.2 
236.7 
179.2 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 

z 

207.4 

225.4 

296 

178.1 

237.5 

171.4 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 

z 

175.8 
225.8 
281.7 
187.5 
227.5 
157.5 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 

z 

176.7 

183.3 

201 

157.5 

194.2 

156.7 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 

z 

165 

205 

233.3 

155 

195.8 

143.3 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 

z 

195 

205.8 

280 

171.7 

226.7 

175 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 

z 

194.2 

199.2 

265 

185 

208.3 

170 

o 

V 

w 

y 

2 

180 

219.2 

270 

192.5 

241.7 

171.7 

w 

X 

y 

z 

215 

235.8 

305 

196.7 

246.7 

199.2 

u 

V 

w 

X 

y 
z 

185.8 

219.2 

263.3 

170 

210 

185 

193.1 
213.1 
261.6 
181.7 
224.6 
171.6 

Average201.7 

233.6 

201.7 

228.0 

226.7 

206.4 

224.3 

229.5 

212.6 

185.6 

190.6 

214.2 

204.8 

214.7 

236.4 

209.2 

213.7 

LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        I3 


TABLE  III.    ISOLATED  LETTERS 

A  Comparison  of  the  Average  Legibility  of  Various 
Faces.     Order  of  Legibility 


UPPER  CASE 


Lower  Case 


The  Sixteen  Roman  Faces 


JENSON 

281.7 

News  Gothic 

236.4 

BULFINCH 

273.8 

Bulfinch 

233.6 

CHELT.  W. 

268.5 

Clearface 

229.5 

CENTURY  0.  S. 

270.4 

Century  0.  S. 

228.0 

CLEARFACE 

269.3 

Century  Exp. 

226.7 

CHELT.  0.  S. 

268.5 

Chelt.  W. 

224.3 

DELLA  ROBBIA 

266.8 

Jensen 

214.7 

NEWS  GOTHiC 

264.6 

Delia  Robbia 

214.2 

CENTURY  EXP. 

264.8 

Gushing  0.  S. 

212.6 

CASLON  0.  S. 

250.7 

Ronaldson 

209.2 

GUSHING  0.  S. 

247.6 

Chelt.  O.  S. 

206.4 

DE  VINNE  NO.  2 

243.2 

De  Vinne  No.  2 

204.8 

RONALDSON 

241.7 

American  Typewr. 

201.7 

GUSHING  MON. 

228.4 

Caslon  O.  S. 

201.7 

GUSHING  NO.  2 

224.8 

Gushing  Mon. 

190.6 

AMERICAN  TYPEWR. 

196.8 

Gushing  No.  2 

185.6 

Average 

252.8 

Average 

213.7 

Bold  Faces 

CENT.  O.S.  BOLD  296  0 
CHELT. O.S. BOLD   286.2 
CLEARFACE  BOLD  273.7 
Average  (Bold)               285.3 

Cent.  O.S.  Bold 
Chelt.  O.  S.  Bold 
Clearface  Bold 

Average  (Bold) 

255.1 
233.4 
230.5 

239.7 

Italic  Faces 

CLEAR.  ITALIC 

274.3 

Clear.  Italic 

231.2 

CHELT.  ITALIC 

259.6 

Chelt.  Italic 

203.8 

DE  VINNE  ITALIC 

235.5 

De  Vinne  Italic 

201.9 

Average  (Italic) 

256.5 

Average  (Italic) 

212.3 

Average  (of  same 

Average  (of  same 

faces,  Roman) 

260.3 

faces,  Roman) 

213.6 

Bold  Italic  Face 


CLEAR.  B.  ITALIC  265 . 4         Clearface  B.  Italic     213.2 


Extra  Bold  Faces 


BOLD  ANT.  307.4 

FRANK.  GOTHIC   284  8 


Bold  Antique        260 . 5 
Franklin  Gothic      245.2 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        I3 


TABLE  III.    ISOLATED  LETTERS 

A  Comparison  of  the  Average  Legibility  of  Various 
Faces.     Order  of  Legibility 


UPPER  CASE 


Lower  Case 


Tht 

I  Sixteen  Roman  Faces 

JENSON 

281.7 

News  Gothic 

236.4 

BULFINCH 

273.8 

Bulfinch 

233.6 

CHELT.  W. 

268.5 

Clearface 

229.5 

CENTURY  0.  S. 

270.4 

Century  0.  S. 

228.0 

CLEARFACE 

269.3 

Century  Exp. 

226.7 

CHELT.  0.  S. 

268.5 

Chelt.  W. 

224.3 

DELLA  ROBBIA 

266.8 

Jensen 

214.7 

NEWS  GOTHIC 

264.6 

Delia  Robbia 

214.2 

CENTURY  EXP. 

264.8 

Gushing  0.  S. 

212.6 

CASLON  0.  S. 

250.7 

Ronaldson 

209.2 

GUSHING  0.  S. 

247.6 

Chelt.  O.  S. 

206.4 

DE  VINNE  NO.  2 

243.2 

De  Vinne  No.  2 

204.8 

RONALDSON 

241.7 

American  Typewr. 

201.7 

GUSHING  MON. 

228.4 

Caslon  O.  S. 

201.7 

GUSHING  NO.  2 

224.8 

Gushing  Mon. 

190.6 

AMERICAN  TYPEWR. 

196.8 

Gushing  No.  2 

185.6 

Average 

252.8 

Average 

213.7 

Bold  Faces 

CENT. O.S.  BOLD  296  0 
CHELT. O.S. BOLD   286.2 
CLEARFACE  BOLD  273.7 
Arem^e  (Bold)               285.3 

Cent.  O.S.  Bold 
Chelt.  O.  S.  Bold 
Clearface  Bold 

Average  (Bold) 

255.1 
233.4 
230.5 

239.7 

Italic  Faces 

CLEAR.  ITALIC 

274.3 

Clear.  Italic 

231 

2 

CHELT.  ITALIC 

259.6 

Chelt.  Italic 

203 

8 

DE  VINNE  ITALIC 

235.5 

De  Vinne  Italic 

201 

9 

Average  (Italic) 

256.5 

Average  (Italic) 

212 

3 

Average  (of  same 

Average  (of  same 

faces,  Roman) 

260.3 

faces,  Roman) 

213 

6 

Bold  Italic  Face 


CLEAR.  B.  ITALIC  265.4 


Clearface  B.Italic     213.2 


Extra  Bold  Faces 


BOLD  ANT.  307.4 

FRANK.  GOTHIC   284  8 


Bold  Antique        260.5 
Franklin  Gothic      245.2 


14 


ROETHLEIN 


TABLE  IV.     ISOLATED  LETTERS 

The  Relative  Legibility  of  the  Letters  of  the 

Alphabet.    (Average  of  Sixteen  Faces; 

192  Readings  of  Each  Letter) 


UPPER  CASE 

Lower  Case 

W 

300.2 

m 

296.8 

M 

293.8 

w 

261.6 

L 

291.1 

d 

254.3 

J 

287.5 

j 

239.4 

I 

280.4 

1 

236.3 

A 

272.4 

P 

236.1 

T 

268.9 

f 

233.0 

C 

265.1 

q 

226.4 

V 

263.5 

y 

224.6 

Q 

261.7 

i 

224.1 

P 

257.9 

h 

222.7 

D 

254.3 

g 

220.6 

0 

254.0 

b 

217.8 

Y 

252.1 

k 

216.9 

U 

251.3 

V 

213.1 

F 

241.6 

r 

203.6 

H 

240.5 

t 

199.6 

X 

239.8 

n 

195.7 

G 

237.6 

c 

193.8 

N 

235.5 

u 

193.1 

Z 

233.8 

0 

190.1 

K 

231.7 

X 

181.7 

E 

223.9 

a 

177.0 

R 

214.0 

e 

173.5 

B 

208.9 

z 

171.6 

.s 

205.7 

s 

152.6 

Average 

252.8 

Average 

213.8 

LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        I  5 


TABLE  V.     UPPER  CASE 

The  Effect  of  Various  Modifications  of  a  Given  Face 

Cheltenham 


RnlH 

Ordinary 

^ 

Bold 

Condensed 

Wide 

Italic 

A   291.7 

A 

303.3 

A 

190.0 

A 

273.3 

B    210.0 

B 

236.7 

B 

204.2 

Co 

B 

220.0 

C    290.0 

C 

295.0 

C 

253.3 

C 

283.3 

D   270.0 

D 

284.2 

D 

260.0 

"S 

D 

261.7 

E    259.2 

E 

273.3 

£ 

225.8 

"1 

E 

237.5 

F    241.7 

F 

281.7 

F 

239.2 

F 

235.0 

G   275.0 

G 

280.0 

G 

232.5 

G 

240.0 

H  256.7 

H 

295.0 

H 

213.3 

H 

263.3 

I      268.3 

I 

306.7 

I 

273.3 

I 

270  0 

J     281.7 

J 

295.0 

J 

290.0 

~  r 

0.1        t^ 

J 

276.7 

K   254.2 

K 

277.5 

K 

234.2 

.  Widi 
of  thii 

K 

240.8 

L    300.0 

L 

311.7 

L 

280.0 

L 

288.3 

M  303.3 

M  321.7 

M 

295.0 

i  S 

M  301.7 

N   261.7 

N 

270.0 

N 

216.7 

•li 
15 

TV 

256.7 

0   278.3 

O 

295.0 

0 

243.3 

O 

280.0 

P    270.8 

P 

293.3 

P 

240.8 

P 

286.7 

Q   291.7 

Q 

300.0 

Q 

258.3 

^■l 

Q 

286.7 

R   255.0 

R 

253.3 

R 

205.0 

R 

244.2 

S;i  215.0 

S 

228.2 

s 

187.5 

?  lettef 
Style 

S 

206.7 

T    271.2 

T 

306.7 

T 

271.7 

T 

258.3 

U   266.7 

U 

298.3 

U 

240.0 

^1 

U 

263.3 

V   288.3 

V 

305.0 

V 

254.2 

V 

240.8 

W  306.7 

W  323.3 

w 

300.0 

^^ 

W^  278.3 

X  263.3 

X 

270.0 

X 

255.0 

X 

242.5 

Y   249.2 

Y 

273.3 

Y 

256.7 

Y 

245.0 

Z    261.7 

Z 

263.3 

Z 

235.0 

Z 

268.3 

Average  268.5 

286.2 

248.2 

^ 

259.6 

i6 


ROETHLEIN 


TABLE  VI.     LOWER  CASE 

The  Effect  of  Various  Modifications  of  a  Given  Face 

Cheltenham 


"RnlH 

Ordinary 

Bold 

Condensed 

Wide 

[talic 

a 

155.0 

a 

195.8 

a 

167.5 

a 

190.8 

a 

159.2 

b 

221.7 

b 

221.7 

b 

209.2 

b 

245.0 

b 

195.0 

c 

180.8 

c 

198.3 

c 

185.8 

c 

200.8 

c 

192.5 

d 

261.7 

d 

285.0 

d 

275.0 

d 

276.7 

d 

263.3 

e 

169.2 

e 

185.8 

e 

170.8 

e 

185.8 

e 

165.0 

f 

235.0 

f 

244.2 

f 

214.2 

f 

241.7 

/ 

261.7 

g 

195.8 

g 

222.5 

g 

202.5 

g 

216.7 

g 

216.7 

h 

211.7 

h 

251.7 

h 

238.3 

h 

238.3 

h 

241.7 

i 

235.0 

i 

226.7 

• 

I 

206.7 

i 

251.7 

i 

251.7 

i 

234.2 

• 

J 

280.0 

• 

J 

246.7 

J 

248.3 

J 

222.5 

k 

211.7 

k 

225.8 

k 

244.2 

k 

224.2 

k 

217.5 

1 

240.0 

1 

270.0 

I 

231.7 

1 

254.2 

I 

230.0 

m 

295.0 

m 

301.7 

m 

273.3 

m 

315.0 

m 

273.3 

n 

181.7 

n 

217.5 

n 

175.8 

n 

208.3 

n 

198.3 

o 

181.7 

o 

192.5 

0 

160.0 

o 

189.2 

0 

169.2 

p 

223.3 

p 

255.0 

P 

225.8 

p 

247.5 

p 

223.3 

q 

221.7 

q 

255.0 

q 

205.8 

q 

219.2 

q 

196.7 

r 

187.5 

r 

223.3 

r 

199.2 

r 

214.2 

r 

205.8 

s 

138.3 

s 

140.8 

s 

135.8 

s 

160.0 

s 

131.7 

t 

183.3 

t 

222.5 

t 

208.3 

t 

190.0 

t 

192.5 

u 

177.5 

u 

217.5 

u 

170.8 

u 

197.5 

u 

179.2 

V 

205.0 

V 

263.3 

V 

208.3 

V 

223.3 

V 

158.3 

w 

263.3 

w 

300.0 

w 

261.7 

w 

293.3 

tt 

245.0 

X 

169.2 

X 

190.8 

X 

185.0 

X 

184.2 

X 

174.2 

y 

222.5 

y 

245.0 

y 

224.2 

y 

236.7 

j; 

174.2 

z 

164.2 

z 

175.8 

z 

154.2 

z 

179.2 

z 

160.0 

Average  206.4 

233.4 

205.9 

224.3 

203.8 

LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        17 


t^  t>; 

C^  CO  t>  l> 

CO  l>; 

CO  CO  CO 

.-;  CO  t^  »0  !>;  00 

1— J    T-H    lO   0    0 

-*'  CO  CO  CO  0 

CO   rH   »0  t^   10 

00  00  00  lO  o 

05  CO  CO  (M'  i-I  ic 

05  (M  00  I>  '^ 

»0  ^  lO  (32  0 

'^f    0  i-H   'rtH    I^ 

!>.  t^  (N  '-H  00 

CO  t^  i-H  ut)  CO  lO 

<N  (M  (M  (M  (M 

CM  (M  (M  (M  CO 

CO  CO  CO  (N  (M 

(M  (N  (M  (M  C-1 

<M  CSI  CO  (M  C^  (N 

cooi       0 

c» 

DeVinne  No.  2 
Century  Exp. 
Cushing  0.  S. 
Clearface 
Delia  Robbia 

cj   cj  .3        OD 

Ci  o  .3         <^ 

^66^''S 

^   d 

3S:i«^d 

X-p  Xi         Irt 

6  >:>p6S 

-g^^cb 

o  o  o  -: 

0)^00          o 

2  bOp^  c^O 

i5 -2  3^  g 

CU  el  c3  oj  :S 
0000:2; 

Bulfin 

Clearf 
Chelt. 
Jenso] 
Centu: 

News 
News 
Delia 
Chelt. 
Cushii 

Clearf 

Centu 

News 

Delia 

Jenso: 

News 

<QQUOui 
CO  i>.  (Z)  CO  00 

u-on:^H-, 

iiijSZO 

clOq^c/^H 

D>^X>HM 

C^  !>■  !>. 

(M         !>.  CO  CO 

1>         (N  t^  00 

00  t^  !>;  t>;  CO  I> 

CO  r-I  06  CO  0 

10   >0   i-H   CO   i—H 

T^'  lO  CO  00  00 

T-i  LO  Tt^  CO  CD 

C5  i-I  CD  CO  CO  CO 

Oi  (M  00  t^  'Tt^ 

CO  CO  CO  Gi  0 

lO  O  T-H  lO  t^ 

CO  00  CO  r-<  CO 

t^  00  T-i  «J0  CO  to 

(N  Ca  C^  C^  (M 

(M  (M  (M  (M  CO 

(M  CO  CO  (M  (M 

(M  (M  <M  <M  (M 

(N  (N  CO  (M  (M  <M 

S          o^d, 

COM             0     dn 

OQ 

ci(            o  o 

02  d,     .^  .5 

^               XX 

.    •      -^  X 

• 

X           •;:3-p 

.X          JDX! 

^         WW 

00  ,  :SW 

CO             o 

f=^     n.          ^^ 

OH      ^^ 

0    O)    0 

cd  S  "  b  b 

•^     C3     C3     S-H     !-i 

fcH         ^H         CS     ^         S-, 

o-^-g  >o 

b^  ^op 

o  o 

Delia 

Clearf 

Clearf 

Centu 

Centu 

Centu 
Centu 
Clearf 

NeAvs 
Centu 

Chelt. 
Bulfin 
Bulfin 
Centu 
Chelt. 

Centu 
Clearf 
Jensoi 

News 
News 

g5| g^^ 

c!  «  g  d-ajlJ 

<CQOQW 

Ul^OX  —  *^ 

^^jS^O 

pHac^cA)h- 

^>^X>N 

(N               !>. 

00  CO  t^ 

t^  CO  CO  CO  CO 

!>.          CO 

CO  CO  Ca  »0         !>; 

0  ci  0  lO  T-H 

10  CO  CO  0  »o 

CO  00  00  00  CO 

CO  T-H  LO  CO  "jO 

CO  00  00  J>  CO  CO 

0  (M  C5  t^  "^ 

CO  t^   CO   0   rH 

lo  o  '— 1  lO  cri 

00  O  CO  C^  C5 

1^  CO  >— 1  ^  CO  i— 1 

CO  <N  <N  (M  C<) 

(N  (M  (M  CO  CO 

(N  CO  CO  c^  csi- 

(M  (M  (N  (N  (M 

C^  (>]  CO  (M  <N  <N 

CO 

Ph                     .<S 

0202        .^ 

si      .2 

O               CO 

^    6 

X                    ^ 

do    5 

„»a    S 

News  Gothi 
Chelt.  0.  S. 
Clearface 
Century  0. 
Clearface 
Bulfinch 

Jenson 
Jenson 
Chelt.  0. 
Bulfinch 
Century 

Century 
Jenson 
Bulfinch 
Bulfinch 
Delia  Ro 

Century 
Century 
Jenson 
Delia  Ro 
Bulfinch 

Clearface 
Chelt.  0. 
Century 
Jenson 
Delia  Ro 

-^(fiUC^U^ 

feOXl-.-o 

^hJ^ZO 

Onap^c/ii- 

3>^X><^s^ 

CX)  CO  !>.  c» 

!>         CO  !>. 

»0  !>;  00  1>  CO 

t^ 

!>.  t^  00  CO  t>. 

0   CO    CO   1-H    10 

0  >0  CO  '-^  0 

C^'    r-H    r-H    ,-H    CO 

CO  lO  O  »0  lO 

»0   1— 1   '— 1    O    00   r- 1 

0  CO  C^  GO  ^ 

t^  t^  t^  0  (N 

CO  '-<  (M  CO  C5 

C2  Ci  'f  <M  O 

t^  Ol  CO  O  CO  CD 

CO  cs  (M  <M  cq 

(M  (M  (N  CO  CO 

CS|  CO  CO  (N  (N 

(M  Oa  <M  <M  CO 

C^  (M  CO  CO  (M  (N 

^.2      "^ 

o3 

.S        CO 

002  02 

.^.^02 

d:S    d 

>        1 

:i^d 

|dd 

^■^6        ^ 

tury 
vs  Go 
finch 
tury 
son 

Clearface 
Chelt.  0. 
Jenson 
Delia  Ro 
Jenson 

finch 
son 
laRo 
It.  0. 
tury 

o  o  03  --^  r^ 

CO  M  >-  "t;  ■^ 

la  Ro 
la  Ro 
tury 
finch 
.finch 

!lt.  0. 

<U  ^    ^    OJ    0) 

w^Ooo 

£  g  S  g  g 

(U    <u    S    ^    ^  ^ 

QQ^Wpqo 

<qqUQw 

fcOffi-^ 

^^^Zzo 

aHOQ::c/}H 

D>^X>-N 

1>.               (N 

l>-  !>.  CO  (M 

T-H                     !>. 

i>  CO      •>:  <^ 

t>.          CO  CO  !>. 

0  i-H  0  0  ci 

CO  CO  CO  t^  CO 

O  »^  CO  O  CD 

T-I  00  >0  CO  00 

CD  O  CO  CO  T-H  O 

0  CO  '— 1  0  >o 

t^  t^  00  Oa  (M 

!>.   rH   O^   t^   C5 

O  O  to  CO  o 

t^  ^  ^  CO  t^  t^ 

CO  (M  CO  CO  C^ 

(M  (M  <N  CO  CO 

C^  CO  CO  (M  C<l 

CO  CO  (M  CSI  CO 

c^  CO  CO  c^  c^  oi 

pH 

o3 

d,      S3      CO 

•r— 1 

02 

&    :i«^d 

Century 
Bulfinch 
Jenson 
Jenson 
Chelt.  0. 

Jenson 
Bulfinch 
Delia  Ro 
Clearface 
Clearface 

Jenson 

Clearface 

Clearface 

Jenson 

Jenson 

Bulfinch 
Bulfinch 
Chelt.  0. 
Bulfinch 
Jenson 

U   Century 

V  Jenson 
W  Delia  Ro 
X   Chelt.  0. 

Y  Century 
Z    Jenson 

<iicQUQuJ 

feOX^^ 

t^jSlZiO 

cuOoCcoH 

I8 

ROETHLEIN 

CO         00 

t>.  !>.  t^         CO 

CO  !>.         CO  to 

to          'i^          CO 

CO  '^          tq  !>;  l>. 

lO  CO  O  O  to 

CD  i-H  CO  lO  00 

TjH  i-i  to  CO  CJ 

1>I  to  to  O  GO 

00  to  O  cm'  CD  T-H 

00  Ol  O  O  00 

to  ^  CO  CO  "^ 

CM  to  1-1  o  c:5 

^+1  CO  i-H  CD  O 

Ol  CM  00  C5  CO  t^ 

T-H  (M  (N  (M  1-1 

iM  <N  (M  CN  (M 

C^l  CM  CO  CM  rt 
CM 

,;  6 

CM  CM  CM  1-1  CM 

T-l  CM  CM  rH  CM  1-1 

a5 

CZ2  d,  g 

02             02 

d     .s^    . 

d&^^  . 

^^ 

•  d      -d 

X        IS02        02 

W     3   •   .   . 

l-H 

pqoooo 

bbf§o^ 

OJ     OJ    <D     H     rj 

OOQOO 

CI   f2       ^ 

^    bJD  1  ^   bX) 

O-     W    °5    CD     tB 

OOOOO 

_g  T!    o3    o  -t^    o 

1-3 

(O-O    O  'C    u 

<+H    tJO-C . 

^«  S  c  o 

D<  O*  !«     M   +-> 

3  >  ^   «   >>  »4 

CO  LQ  CO  lO 

t>.          CO  CO  t^ 

CO  to         I>  to 

CO  CO  !>.          1> 

'^  oo  J>;  CO  tq  CM 

W 

o  CO  t^  CO  t^ 

CD  LO  CO  CO  CD 

CO  cm'  to  CO  i>^ 

CO   (Z5   CO   CO    r-J 

i>^  to  i-J  CO  i>  oi 

i-q 

Oi  (M  O  t^  (X) 

lO  "*  CO  '^  to 

CO     to     T-l     T-H     O 

Tt^  CO  1-H  O  C-1 

O  CM  00  O  CO  t^ 

fa 

T-H    (N    (M    (M   rl 

(>J  (M  <M  <M  (N 

CM  CM  CO  CM  CM 

CM  CM  CM  i-H  Ol 

CM  CM  CM  T-l  CM  1—1 

o 

a   ?3         &(  ci 

doi          ^• 

u   d,             a 

o  S  02  d  d 

^  ^  .2 

o 
O 

M 

Q 

O 

o 

X    .           > 

WO   .      s 

^, dd^  ,,  . 

O    O    C    ^     ^ 

op^l  bb 

o  O)   ;3   J3  S 

-+J  -(^  ;ii  cC     . 

ooom<5 

ob^^o 
<;oooi2; 

ps  S    C    c    ri 

;2;Gooo 

1^               o    <^  t>- 
OoO^OQ 

(OjD   O'XS   O) 

«w  bjO-fl.--'-3 

^^  S  c  o 

Q.    O"  V-l     M   4-3 

3   >   ^  X  >»  N 

02 

00         !>  t^  !>. 

CO          TtH 

CO  CM  --H  CO  t^ 

t^  tq  CO 

tq       CO       t^  tq 

O  lO  i-H  O  >— 1 

O  O  00  LO  '#' 

CO  •^'  to  CO  i-H 

to  O  CO  t^  CO 

CM  O  CO  to  1-5  CM 

Q 

CI  '^i  <M  t^  Ci 

CD  to  CO  ^  CO 

CO    to   CM    '— 1    r-H 

to  to  ^  CO  CM 

1-1  CO  Oi  C5  '^  oo 

--•  <M  <M  CSJ  T-* 

(M  (M  (N  (M  (N 

CM  CM  CO  CM  CM 

CM  C>1  C<l  ^  CM 

CM  CM  CM  ^  CM  T-( 

O    O  .^    O 

.2       doi 

0202 

CO    o 

0202         d,    .02 

<1 

.   -tJ  -^J  X!   -t^ 

-o      WO 

Ol                  .      . 

•  .    oo 

02                  .-2 

•          0:5 

X02     . 

OO    -W    -o 

g 

>    O    O    O    O 

o  oi             o 

H-l     C3     ^     fH     CS 

^^1  bo 

-+J  -(^  --;  +f    tn  -*J 

P5   g   <u   rt   c   C 

O       a>    rd       O       (T)       o 

s 

^     O)    <D     O     0) 

^    CO    _(    _i    03 

Qoooo 

O    ^    B    ^    ai 

Scd  cd  -^  1 
g'3'^  g| 

O 
< 

(0J2  OTP  <U 

<4-     "(Mr^.^.^ 

v^^  S  fi  o 

a  cr  t-  co+-> 

D    >     ^    X     >«N 

1>                 !>.  !>; 

I-^  !>.  !>  (M  CO 

!>;  !>.  CO  CO 

t^       j:^  to 

00                  t^ 

CO  »0  O  CO  '— < 

1— i  1— 1  1— I  Ci  o 

to  GO  CD  CO  CO 

O  O  CO  t^  00 

to  to  CD  O  to  CO 

P4 

Ci  ^  CO  1>  C5 

O  to  ^  '^i  O) 

CO  to  O-l  i-H  .— 1 

to  to  CM  CO  CM 

1— 1  CO  o  o  Tti  oi 

^  (M  C^  iM  ^ 

(N  (M  <M  (M  (M 

CM  CM  CO  CM  CM 

CM  CM  CM  --1  CM 

CM  CM  CM  CM  CM  T-l 

02 

idn         02               . 

O    O 

d      o       d, 

d  d 

Q   o        02 

1— 1 

X           .        CO 

^            ^            fi 

•  f-H    tH 

X      •■P,       X 
W      :S      H 

X    X 

WW 

o 

js  jzi  ^  o  9 

blo-^  b 

551^^1 

o 

-1^  ;=;  +.5  ;=H  CO 

C   2    rt    a)   cj 

sis  P  P 

3  3  3  53  li 

ll  il-2 
g3  S 3  g 

•♦-I    3   3   C  H-< 

-3  S  g  ^-S 
OOOPQO 

gg'slll 

.^^-2   o    ==    ^ 

!2;^Qc3pqpQ 

c«J2  0'T3   (J 

V4-  -OOJ^ . 

^_-  E  c  o 

Dh  C?  ^    t/5  -M 

=5  >  ^  X  >.N 

lO         Ci  ^  lO 

CO  CO          t>  CO 

I>-  O-l  CO          CO 

CM  to  to  to  oo 

t^  I>.  iq 

o 

t^  uo  lO  CO  l>I 

CO  00  t^  i-I  CO 

CO  O  CO  O  00 

i-H   t^   l>   I>I   O 

to  O  to  T— J  o  l>^ 

o 

o  "*  CO  CO  Oi 

CD  to  Tt^  to  00 

CO  00  CO  CM  ^ 

l>  to  CO  1>  CO 

CM  '^  O  1— 1  m  OS 

r-l  (M  (M  C^  ^ 

(M  CM  (M  (M  (N 

CM  CM  CO  CM  CM 

CM  CM  CM  T-l  CM 

CM  O-l  CO  CO  CM  'th 

W 

OJGC               CO 

_o  _o               &I 

o 

_o  .2  .2 

^o        _o  _o 

^:S        .W 

do       d 

13 

3  S  S 
-1^  -tj  -t-i 

'S        'S  'S 

>-H       ?H       ^       Co       ?-4 

CO  5^^  b 

-1     ?J     rH     O     ,H 

-3  ^30-3 

_-.    O    O    0_cH 

oOOO  o 

_rJ  _c!    O    r-.    O    O 

o oOoOO 

ooooo 

M  cc  't;  ^J  _g 

t^    !^    5^  3    c 

£  rfS  Ps 

3     M     M     W     a 

ss  is  P  P 

3  Ji  :3  o  3 

13    O    O    OJ     Ci 

3    C!    O  3    OJ    O) 

l2;:2;ooo 

pqoPQ^W 

pq^^^W 

pqW^pQlz^lz; 

C^^   (JTS   0) 

H-    ClD^  .rt-r-s 

_i^^  E  c  0 

CXCTi-  trt-^ 

3   >  5   X  >»N 

LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES 


19 


0 

Eh 

[a 

hH 

^ 

CJJ 

>H 

H 

e! 

hH 

P 

1-J 
l-H 

C) 

PQ 

M 

S 

0 
la 

u 

y^ 

Fi 

M 

ta 

H-I 

Ph 

b 

U) 

0 

w 

« 

Q 

W 

<) 

0 

1^ 

p:; 

<ii 

0 

W 

w 

'Z 

hH 

0 

15 

n 

U 

0 

0 
H 

K 

C/2 

t^ 

W 

;^ 

^ 

a 

<J 

K 

^ 

h-I 

< 

(^ 

0 

J 

< 

eq 

^ 

Ki 

a 

Eh 

Eh 

rr 

^ 

H 

c 

i-q 

ffi 

(yj 

H 
m 

^ 

H 

>l 

p 

cc 

is 

0 

0 

0 

CO 

12: 

p^ 

0 

IS 

0 

02 

0 

W 

0 

w 

&H 

CO  t^  C<1  !>.  <N 

(M  C^  CO        !> 

CO  CO           00 

CO       t^ 

»0  00  1>  !>■  CM  !>. 

CO  CD  C5  CD  05 

-^  rtn  CO  0  T-H 

06  CO  0  »o  0 

10   10   06  0   i-H 

t-^  06  i-H  CO  cri  CO 

CO  0  10  Tt"  0 

CO  rH   CO  t^  00 

(M  CO  C3i  C^  CO 

TfH    TtH    Oi   0   10 

CO  'rt^  0  CO  Tfl  i-H 

(M  (N  (M  (M  (M 

(M  iM  (M  <M  (M 

(M  (M  (N  (M  C^ 

(M  (M  i-H  (N  (M 

CM  CM  CO  CM  05  CM 

C^ 

(M 

(M 

<M 

CM         CM         CM 

CO  d  6 

oi       d      CO 

.  d  ai  d 

6       6       6 

Ison 
0.  S 
Ison 
Ison 

g  No 

.  0  y^ 
^'^   (D   0   0 

0  fl  '^  P3  0 
^  0  (D  0  ^ 

nO.  S 
ng  Mo 
ngO. 
mne  N 
Idson 

0    OJ    0    0       -CD 

bjO  bC  Pi  .iS  ^ 

bJO^    P3  ^    bX) 

^  Pi  ^  fi  0  0 

^  rt  ^^  P3 

P3    rt    P3^.ii 

C    '-'    P3  ^    p3 

2  i=i  ^  P3        ^ 

c3    0    o3    c3  -q 

la  ;5  >  "^  =^ 

^1>    1^ 

CO     P5            g     CO 

rn    ^    !n          tl 

o3  ^  o3  ^r;  -^^  »C 
pi^  Pi^-o;^ 

^    c3    9    0    ^ 

3  -s  CD  0  q 

::;  0  CD  q  3 

i    13    pi    0^    ^ 

0  0  0  a;  jH  <i> 

C^OP^P^O 

OOQP^P^ 

u^p\^6 

OOOPPh 

P^QP^QOQ 

<!pqoQ[ij 

feOE    hHH-. 

Wh4^^0 

O^CP^  CAjfH 

p>^X>Htsj 

LO  (M  (M  CO  CO 

iC  CO  (N  CO  (M 

CO  !>;                  !>; 

CO  !>;  I>;  10  1> 

CO  l>-  !>;  CO  »>•  1>. 

(>;  '^^IH  as  CO  06 

i>l  CO  tH  oo  T-H 

CD  l-H  10  0  CD 

CO  »-H  CD  t^  i-H 

CO  CO  i-H  06  i-H  0 

10  0  10  '*  0 

T— 1  1— 1  1— 1  CD  !>• 

C^  00  t^  C^  (M 

CO  CO  (Ti  02  10 

CO  Th  Oi  CM  "*  1-1 

(M  (M  (M  (M  <M 

(M  CM  oq  <M  (N 

C^  (M  (M  (N  CM 

(M    (M    rH    1—1   C<l 

CM  CM  CM  CM  CM  CM 

iM 

(N 

^.         (N         ^. 

.      .               CM 

02  02  02.^ 

C         fl 

.    .  gcd  d 

.      .    0 

mm    . 

.      .      .  jD      . 

ng  Mo 
Idson 
ng  ]\Io 

.  0.  S. 
ng  No 

MCO  0       ^ 

gNo 
Ison 
gNo 
0.  S 

ne  N' 

.    .  m      0 

ngO 
ngO 
ngO 
Rob 
Idson 

00  •  SIz;  a 

^  ^0  0  '^  0 

biD  iJO^  ^    bjO^ 

p:  d  G  c3  a 

Pi  jrd  Pi  rt  Pi 

c  fl  fl2  o2 

3 ;^^ ^  ^ 

M    c«    tn  r— 1    g 

•3    03  -jZl  -M  -pi 

CO     g     M     CD     CO 

^^:a:a> 

:a  2  :a  0  > 

CC     g     CO     M  '^ 

•p  'Pl    0    03  ^3    03 

CO     CO     CO     '-'     CO     i-l 

CO    CO    CO    02    ,, 

=1  :3  =:^  0 

:3    0    13^    ;3 

OPhOOO 

03    03    ;3    li    0^ 

Pi3    P2    03^ 

OPhOOG 

pi    P3    03    0    j3    q 
OOOp:?OP^ 

<:3pqoOW 

Pr^OW . 

^  J^^O 

0.  OQi  coH 

tD>^  ><1>-N 

I>.  !>.  i>.  t^  CO 

I>  10  00  t^  !>. 

»0  I>.  CO         (M 

i>.  05  CO  CO  >o 

10  >0  CO  10  CO  to 

i-H  CD  T-H  CD  CO 

0  r^  CO  CD  CD 

I>^  CD  CO  Id  C5 

CO  T)H  CO  CO  t^ 

CM  t^  06  CM  CO  r^ 

Ttl  C^  LO  CO  0 

r-H    C3   »— 1    "O   CD 

1 1     CO     t^     ' 1     T— ( 

CO  (M  Oi  00  CO 

CO  CO  00  0-1  CO  0 

C^  T-H  (M  (M  .-H 

C^    r-H   (M   C^   (M 

(M  (M  C^  (M  <M 

(M  (M  ^  i-H  (M 

CM  CM  CM  CM  CM  CM 

<N            ... 

^  .  .^. 

^      •  <^            • 

(M  (M 

.  CM  CM      .      .      . 

fi    C  CO 

.    .m  a  0 

.^    Pi     .    Pi    P5 

Pi  d  d  Pi  Pi 

Pi    .    .  Pi  Pi  Pi 

0          00. 

^    bC  bX)  bC  C 

_3  0  0  0  0 

0  >-?- 15?-  0  0 

1^    <H    1^    1^    1^ 

000000 

!2^  g^SO 

I  Robl 
ing  M 
ing  N 
ing  M 
ing  M 

g:2;^ggg 

bC^    bJD  iaC  bO 

bJD  Pi    Pi    be  bJD 

bC  bC  bjO  bC  bC  bC 

fl  ^   C    fl    fl 
CO    g    tn    m    03 

c  c  g  c  S 

^    B    B    ^    ^ 

Pi  Pi  g  Pi  Pi  Pi 

^^^^> 

^  ^  ^  ^  ^ 

..C>->^^ 

^  ^  ^  ^  ^  ^ 

02     CO     M     02     ^, 

r-H    m    M    m    CO 

C»  ^,,      ^^      CO      CO 

M     CO     CO     M     CO     CO 

:=  0  :3  3  s 

c3    P3    P3    P3^ 

^    ^    ^    ^    ^ 

J-    OJ    (D    ^j    ^ 

uQQoo 

2   P3   =)   Pi   Pi   ;3 
000000 

<:fqun  w 

t^  0  Wi-H «-? 

^^Szo 

pL,  acsf  02  H 

;d>^x!>m 

(M_  (M_  CO  CO  CO 

CO  c^  10  (N 

!>.  CO  !>. 

(M_         t^  ^  00 

l>         10         CM 

'*'  oi  CO  06  CO 

(X)  '^  C^'  Tj^  0 

0   1-H    06   T-H    10 

oi  0  CD  od  cr> 

0  CD  10  CM  "O  '^ 

CO  t^  '^  '-H  02 

0  OO  0  ^  CD 

0  CD  CD  0  --H 

(M  (N  CO  CO  (M 

CM  CO  00  1-1  CM  0 

C^  '-H  <N  (M  i-c 

C<J  1-H  (M  (M  (M 

(M  (M  (M  (M  (M 

(M  CM  T-i  ,-(  (M 

CM  CM  CM  CM  CM  CM 

.      .  (M  (M      . 

cq  "^  c^  c<i     . 

.  (M         (M  (M 

(N      .  (N      . 

CM      .      .  CM  '^  CM 

fl   C     .     .   ;-, 

.  0  .  •  e 

Pi    . 

.       ^H           .       ^ 

.  Pi  Pi    .  d    • 

0   0   0   0   k 

0  1;^    0    0    0 

00       00 

0       fe       0       fe 

0  0  0  0  b?-  0 

faJD  bJO  bJO  bJD  >, 

§^  §^^ 

Ronaldson 
Gushing  N 
Am.  Type^ 
Gushing  N 
Am.  Type'' 

bC  n    bO  bO  bjO 

bO  bC^    bC  bJO 

be  bO  bfi  bJO  Pi    bjD 

.s.a.s.SH 

q  _g  c  g  g 

Pi  s  j=;  Pi  Pi 

CO     CO     g     CO     CO 

g  Pi  fl  pi.g  Pi 

^ ^ ^^  . 

;5  j>i3ia  la 

;j:i  "^  ^  S  >■  s 

CC     02     M     W     rH 

CO              CO     CO     CO 

CO     CO     CO     CO     ,       CO 

;=   =5   q   13  G 

oooo<l 

P3    0    US    ;3    13 

oPooo 

=3    P3    q    j3    pi 
OOPhOO 

P3    pi   ::3   pi    0^   p 

ooooPo 

<  pq  0  QH 

U.OX>-.H^ 

M  jSZO 

P^Opc;  c/)EH 

D>^X>.N 

t>  t^       CO  10 

!>.  <N                l>. 

10  CO  Ol  (M_  I> 

»0         CO  CM 

00             10  t>.  iq 

T-H  CD  >0  CO  (N 

'-H  ci  0  0  CD 

t^  06  c^i  ^'  CD 

0  I>  0  CO  oi 

C5   10   10   cm'   i-H   t^ 

(M  t^  C35  (X.  Oi 

C3i  CD  C5  CO  (M 

t^  ■*  00  CO  CO 

CJi  l-H  CiO  CO  l-H 

0  0  CO  C32  CM  00 

C^   1— 1   1— (   r— 1   1 — 1 

-— 1    --H    r-H    (M    (M 

1 — 1  C<)  1 — 1  1 — 1  1 — 1 

l-H  CM  l-H  1—1  CM 

CM  CM  i-H  i-H  CM  1— 1 

',^    u    u    ;h    C3 

U      U      U      U      lA 

;^    ;^    ^^    !L^    ;^ 

.      .      •      .  <M 

U     t-i     ^     t^       . 

tJ,    !^    t^    ^    %^    ^^ 

^     ^     ^     ^^ 

^    p:    ^    ^   ^ 

fe:    p:    ^    ^    ^ 

<D    CD  S     CD  Z 

;^   ^   ii   '^   ^   ^ 

CD    (D    O)     CD  S 

0    CD    <X)    CD    Qi 

(D     03    0    CD    CD 

a;     CD    (D     (D    Q.)    4) 

a    CI.    &H    a 

Oh  p.,  Ph  Ph  &, 

Ph  Ph  P.  Cu  a 

^  i^tl  f=^Tl 

&,  Ph  P^  a  P,  Ph 

>.>>>.>.«) 

>>>.>.>.>. 

>.>>>>>>  >^ 

>,  t>,bC>,bX) 

>>  >-.  >^  >-.  >i  >^ 

a  s  a  s  1 

EhHHHH 

HHHHH 

HH.an.a 

HHHEhHH 

a  a  a  a  a  a 

a  a  a  a  a 

a  a  a  a  a 

pi  P  2  pi  CO 

5-1     I-H     ;3     K     ^ 

<5<:<<<i^o 

<ji<ii<:<<^ 

<<<<<3l<t1< 

<<<lo<^o 

<1  <t^  <^  <;  <j  <j 

<  PQ  0  0.  W 

[xi  c!3  K  M  t-a 

Wh^SI^O 

Ph(3?P^C/2  H 

tD>^}><!>HlSl 

20 


ROETHLEIN 


^ 

H 

, 

^ 

U 

u 

g 

M 

jyj 

(H 

Fh 

Ph 

t-l 

& 

1-1 

O 

P5 

HH 

o 

i=( 

1— 1 

p^ 

^ 

0 

o 

w 

p^ 

Q 

w 

<J 

Q 

>i, 

Pi 

CJ 

H 

« 

^ 

(H 

Q 

Q 

hJ 

;?; 

hJ 

n 

U 

C) 

O 

w 

w 

CO 

o 

M 

ffi 

^ 

^ 

<1 

<; 

W 

Ph 

^ 

ij 

<1 

pq 

CJ 

HH 

O 

W 

W 

W 

H-1 

H 

F-i 

cc 

-< 

H 

O 

K 

xn 

W 

w 
H 

CO 

H-) 

^ 

o 

o 

o 

Z 

o 

P 

u 

CO 

o 

w 

o 

w 

i:^ 

H 

(M  l>.  l>  l>. 

to  t^  (M  to 

1^  I>  !>. 

CO  CM         to  CO 

CO  i>-  CO  to 

05  CO  1-5  CD  to 

to  CM  o  ^'  t^ 

CO  1—1  1— 1  o  o 

CO  cJ  o  to  o6 

O  to  00  1-^  00  CM 

CO  O  00  rfH  CO 

CI    O   1-H    i-H   C^l 

O  C^l  Ci  05  00 

CM  T-i  O  '^i  00 

00  o  -^  t^  1-1  CO 

i-l  (N   t-H  (M   i-H 

CM  CM  CM  CM  CM 

CM  CM  CM  1—1  1—1 

CM  CM   i-<  r- 1  T-4 

r-H  CM  C^l   1-1  CM   T-I 

02              aj 

CM 

m 

CM 

CM 

Idson  0. 
ng  0.  S, 
Robbia 
n  0.  S. 
Idson  0. 

nO.  S. 
n  0.  S. 
nO.  S. 
nne  No. 
ng  0.  S, 

Robbia 
Gothic 
nO.  S. 
nO.  S. 
Idson  0. 

.  0.  s. 

Robbia 
ng  No.  ! 
nO.  S. 

nO.  S. 

.  0.  s. 

nne  No. 

iry  Exp, 
nO.  S. 

Rona 
Cushi 
Delia 
Jenso 
Rona 

Casio 
Jenso 
Casio 
DeVi 

Cushi 

c3    g^^    % 

"^    >T^    m    m    ^ 

<a  ^   <A   <A    o 

q;z;oop^ 

Chelt 
Chelt 
Delia 
Cushi 
Jenso 

Jenso 
Chelt 
DeVi 
Casloi 
Cent  I 
Casio 

aJ.O    OT)    a> 

u-    b*0j2  —  .^ 

.bi^  £  c  o 

D<  cr*  V-   w  -to 

3     >    ^     X    >J    tsj 

»0  CO  (N         M 

CO  to  C-1  CO 

CM  !>.  t>. 

00  to  CM  CO  CO 

to  CM  CO        t^  CM 

i>^  CO  oj  to  ^' 

to  cc  i>l  oi  00 

O  oi  CO  i-i  to 

O  t^  O  CO  CO 

!>;  ci  CO  o  o  ai 

CO  O  t^  Tt<  CO 

CM  Oi  O  O  ^ 

o  1-1  oo  00  i> 

CM  1-H  00  Tf<  00 

i>  o;  ■*  i>  1— 1  to 

r-H   (M    i-H   (M    1-1 

CM  T-i  CM  CM  CM 

C^l  CM  CM  i-H  1-1 

C^l    CM   1-1   rH   T-( 

1—1   1—1    CM    r^   CM    1—1 

.      .^      . 

«?               CM 

CO 

<M        02  02 

.g  n c/2 oco 

.^O  b    •    • 

^    .  d^      d 

•  d 

d    -OO  '-^ 

Sl'^^a 

l"?[3»l 

^  floj^M 

«^^^^«l 

o       ^^  o  ^^ 

bC*^   >,0   bJD 

d  gcjdo 

•  a;  ^  o  o  Q, 

O  fi  -^^  ^  >; 

shin 

slon 

ntur 

elt. 

shin 

^2    .  rt    . 

— ^     «2     W     g     CO 

Jenso 
Rona 
Am.' 
Casio 
Cushi 

o  03  +2  c>  ;i^ 

;ii  JC  o   c:  C3  "^ 
«^  Ts  "m  S  S  d 

CD    13    -3    O    3 

QOOPhO 

:i    03    S  -d    13 

ooooo 

OPhOOO 

^  ^   c3   Q   o   c 
OPOp:;p:?< 

«5  ^  o  Ti  o 

M-l    fajOrCj  .-  ._ 

^  _  S  c  o 

Ol    O*    W,      M     .faj 

3    >    ^    X    l>.N 

GO  00  (M_  CO  to 

00         t^ 

to  CO  t^  to  to 

to  to  CO  00  00 

1>         CO  CM  CO  to 

to  id  '^  CO  c<j 

to  to  lO  CO  o 

I>  00  CO  CM  CM 

l>^  CM  CO  i-I  O 

CD  to  CO  Ci  0C>  t^ 

to  C5  t^  CO  CO 

O  Ci  O  O  1-H 

C5i  O  t^  t^  I> 

T-I    l-H    (^    Th    00 

i>  cn  CO  CO  o  to 

1— 1    T— 1   1 — 1    (N    i-H 

CM  >-<  CM  CM  CM 

1—1  CM  CM  1-1  1-H 

CM  CM  1-1  1-;  1-1 

T— 1  T— 1  CM  1— <  CM  1— < 

.^^1  .  . 

CM         CM 

CM      .      .      . 

CO  <^.      .C/2 

^             .         ^.      . 

Co      .    C    !-> 

d        d  ;-*'     • 

.      .    flCCCC 

Ison  0 
ne  No 
g  Mon 
[son  0 
0.  S. 

.  f^  a       c  o2 

s  '^  >;  ^  CD 

hJ3  d    bJD  bC  >^ 

neN 
0.  S. 
neN 
ypew 
0.  S 

0)00.. 

^!2;^oo 

bjj  >,  bX)0    G    bX) 

Cushin 
DeVin 
Cushin 
Cushin 
Am.  T; 

DeVin 
Chelt. 
DeVin 
Am.  T; 
Jenson 

«.s  .s.s.s 

^  ^  !5  S  ^ 

CO     CO     CO     02     CO 

nald 
:Vin 
shin 
nald 
slon 

shin 
.1.  T; 
shin 
elt. 
Vin 
shin 

c3   ;3   d  d  S 

ooooo 

O    0^    ^3    O    03 

p:5P0P40 

o<:ooPo 

cj  .D  o  t::!  d) 

<^    OOJS-H  .^ 

j^^  S  d  o 

0<    O"    n     C/2    +-I 

P    >     ^     X     >>  N 

00           !>;           t^ 

CM  t^          CM  !>; 

CO  00  CO  CO  00 

t^  t^         CM 

00  00  GO  to  GO  1> 

to  O  i-H  O  CO 

"^   i-H   O   Tj^"   O 

00  cJ  CO  ■*■  o 

to  CO  i-J  "^  ci 

to  O  O  t>^  to  CD 

to  Oi  t^  CO  '^l 

00  C5  o  o  ^ 

00  C5  t^  CO  t^ 

o  o  00  00  t^ 

t^  (X  O  to  Cj:  to 

1 — 1   1— (    r— 1    C^    T— 1 

1-1  1— 1  CM  C-1  CM 

T— i  1 — 1  CM  »— 1  1— 1 

CM  CM  1—1  CO  1-1 

1—1  1—1  C-i  1—1  1—1  1—1 

(M 

(N^      M_      . 

•^(M      .^. 

<^^  ■^■'2  • 

CM  CM      .CM 

.    .  c  ^  c 

ing  No. 
inne  No. 
ing  Mon 
Mson  0, 
1  Robbia 

^*  d    .Co 

.  co.^  fi 

CO      .      .      .    g      . 

oco  o  ^  O 
bJo'O    bC  >"  bD 

>.  fl    biD  bJO  fl 

ing  No 
ing  Mo 
ildson  < 
.  Robb: 
ing  Mo 

.  CO  c   o   o  O 
bjo'^'    bC  bJO  bJD  bC 

•S  g.SH.S 

H.S.S.S.S 

c  c  f^  c  c  c 

rd   ^   rd          .   ^ 

W     CO     M     rH      03 

13    ci    ;3    G    ;3 

CO  "^        03     K  —1 

S   a;   g  ^  a; 

CO    -f:    e '— <    ^ 

03     03     CO     CO     CO     02 

^    O    j3    O    O) 

3  US  q  <u  s 

;;   c3    P    3    ^    J3 

ooo<ic:) 

oPop^Q 

-<pu6q 

^UP^QZJ 

UOOOOO 

rt  _Q  o^d   <u 

^   b«-E|  .-H  — 

^  —  S  fl  o 

G.   U  t-(    t/3    ■(-> 

;r  >   ^  X   >,  N 

i>.  CO  00 

CO  to  00          CO 

CO  to        tq 

00  !>.  00  CO  CM 

CO  CO         CM  CO 

to  i-H  a5  to  o 

00  CM*  O  O  CO 

CO  t^  to  c^i  o 

<d  CO  to  00  ci 

to  CO  CO  to  Tt^'  CO 

to  1-^  CO  O  "* 

t^  «j  o  o  o 

00  C5  Oi  CO  i> 

O  C5  t^  CO  CO 

CO  CO  X  to  o  -^ 

1 — 1  1 — 1  1 — 1  O'l  1— 1 

1-H   r-(   1-1   CM    C^l 

1 — 1    1 — 1    1 — 1   r— 1   1— 1 

CM  »— 1  1 — 1  1 — 1  1— 1 

T-H    1-H    T— t   1— 1    1—1   1-H 

(M      .  <N  CM 

CM  CM      . 

CM      .         CM  CM 

.  CM  CM         CM 

•  CM      .      -CM      . 

•       rH           •           • 

d    .    .    .  c 

.    <A    i^      .      . 

C      .      . 

C            .        ^H        g            .       g 

.-^'   o   ^   o  o 

O  r/2   O   O    O 

O  O   fe:   O   O 
bC  bJO  >,  bC  bJO 

O    O    O  ./    o 

c  o  ^  o  o  o 

O   bjD  >^  bC  biD 

S     .^^S 

Slz;  |SJz;§ 

bc'^   bJO  bC  bC 

bC  bC  bcO   bJD 

bC  bC  >^  bC  bC  b£i 

^.SH.S.S 

.S  rt.S.S   s 

_g  S  H  .S  .S 

C    C    C      .    C 

c  c  ^  c  c  g 

;i^xj    .AA 

rC^-d^^ 

IS  ^    .  ^  !5 

'^'^'rs:i;i={'^ 

s;h  .is:s;j3 

<P     W     r^     to     03 

CO     03     CO     CO     02 

CO     02     c;     CO     CO 

:3  :3  c  13  13 

CO     O'     CO     (LI     03 

CO     02     C     CO     CO     W 

;3  ir;  c  =3  13  s 

^  3  C  r3  ;= 

d     Oj     3     3     ^S 

p  q;   3^   13 

oo-<oo 

ooooo 

oo<:oo 

oouoo 

oo<ooo 

(0  J3    O   T3    <U 

.«    tJDJlS  —  ••-. 

^  ^   S     G    O 

P<  a*  k.   u5  -»-• 

J3     >    ^     X     >»   N 

LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES         21 


TABLE   XI.      THE  AVERAGE   LEGIBILITY   OF   GROUPED 

LETTERS 

The  Numbers  in  this  Table  Indicate  the  Average  Distance 
AT  Which  Each  Letter  of  Each  Face  Was  Read.  Nine 
Face's  Were  Selected  for  this  Experiment;  and  only 
Lower  Case  Letters  Were  Employed.  The  Averages  are 
Compiled  from  'Internal'  Letters  Only,  i.  e.,  the  Initial 
Letters  and  the  Final  Letters  of  the  Groups  are  not 
Included  in  these  Averages 


a; 

o 
d 
o 
-^ 
o 

e 

(i, 

!Xl 

(^^ 

c 

ai 

o 

c3 

X 

6 

a 

o 

6 

s 

c 

c^ 

-2 

1-1 

CI 
a 

bJO 

fcJD 

O 

O 
m 

»— « 

"m 

c 

C 

o 

m 

2 

> 

o 

^ 

a 

QJ 

o; 

I-* 

3 

r-" 

<a 

m 

O 

o 

O 

O 

O 

o 

"^ 

CO 

a  140 

a 

137 

a  150 

a  145 

a  142 

a  123 

a  139 

a  160 

a  135 

b  138 

b 

155 

b  158 

b  155 

b  152 

b  138 

b  146 

b  170 

b  182 

c  147 

c 

130 

c  140 

c  143 

c  152 

c  131 

c  142 

C  167 

c  123 

d  142 

d 

133 

d  154 

d  150 

d  158 

d  123 

d  140 

d  163 

d  127 

e  124 

e 

127 

e  135 

e  145 

e  135 

e  120 

e  138 

e  149 

e  115 

f  160 

f 

175 

f  193 

f  178 

f  168 

f  120 

f  150 

f  174 

f  170 

g  185 

g 

190 

g  205 

g200 

g210 

g  195 

g  213 

g218 

g  215 

h  163 

h 

184 

h  170 

h  160 

h  165 

h  150 

h  172 

h  113 

h  150 

i  143 

i 

143 

i  156 

i  168 

i  153 

i  152 

i  167 

i  162 

i  149 

j  140 

J 

175 

j  170 

j  180 

j  165 

3  175 

j  187 

j  155 

j  160 

k  183 

k 

183 

k  160 

k  185 

k  175 

k  150 

k  195 

k  168 

k  185 

1  136 

1 

137 

1  153 

1  162 

I  163 

1  141 

1  147 

1  138 

I  148 

ml48 

m 

141 

ml52 

ml44 

ml52 

ml47 

m  165 

mlG5 

ml48 

n  136 

n 

129 

n  140 

n  145 

n  155 

n  150 

n  145 

n  146 

n  127 

o  143 

o 

139 

0  141 

0  155 

o  160 

0  128 

0  138 

0  160 

o  120 

p  158 

P 

195 

p  190 

p  168 

p  195 

p  195 

p  220 

p  169 

p  185 

q  150 

q 

163 

q  177 

q  190 

q  175 

q  147 

q  173 

q  173 

q  164 

r  146 

r 

141 

r  158 

r  165 

r  141 

r  141 

r  157 

r  158 

r  141 

s  165 

s 

122 

s  135 

s  152 

s  130 

s  120 

s  133 

S  175 

s  129 

t  136 

t 

125 

t  149 

t  158 

t  123 

t  128 

t  173 

t  171 

t  158 

u  153 

u 

123 

u  140 

u  145 

u  150 

u  133 

u  153 

U  166 

u  136 

V  153 

V 

154 

V  157 

V  153 

V  158 

V  138 

V  153 

V  154 

V  148 

wl88 

w 

170 

wl87 

wl95 

wl85 

w  188 

w203 

Wl98 

wl85 

X  166 

X 

133 

X  158 

X  161 

X  144 

X  134 

X  158 

X  167 

X  137 

y  153 

y 

142 

y  160 

y  162 

y  170 

y  155 

y  195 

y  164 

y  158 

z  163 

z 

126 

z  135 

z  149 

z  147 

z  120 

z  130 

Z  165 

z  125 

Aver.   150 

149 

159 

162 

159 

144 

163 

166 

151 

T 


2  2  ROETHLEIN 

TABLE   XII.     THE   RELATIVE   LEGIBILITY   OF 
GROUPED  LETTERS 

The  Letters  in  Each  Horizontal  Line  of  this  Table  are 
Arranged  in  Descending  Order  of  Legibility — the 
Vertical  Column  at  the  Left  Containing  the  Most 
Legible  Alphabet.  The  Data  from  which  this  Table 
Was  Compiled  did  not  Include  the  Initial  Letters 
nor  the  Final  Letters  of  the  Groups 


a 

a 

a 

a 

a 

a 

a 

a 

a 

b 

b 

b 

b 

b 

b 

b 

b 

b 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

c 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

d 

e 

e 

e 

e 

e 

e 

e 

e 

e 

f 

f 

f 

f 

f 

f 

f 

f 

f 

g 

g 

g 

g 

S 

g 

g 

g 

g 

h 

h 

h 

h 

h 

h 

h 

h 

h 

• 

1 

i 

i 

i 

i 

i 

• 

I 

i 

i 

• 

J 

J 

j 

j 

• 

J 

i 

j 

j 

• 

) 

k 

k 

k 

k 

k 

k 

k 

k 

k 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

m 

m 

m 

m 

m 

m 

ra 

m 

m 

n 

n 

n 

n 

n 

n 

n 

n 

n 

0 

o 

0 

o 

0 

o 

0 

0 

o 

P 

P 

p 

P 

P 

P 

P 

P 

P 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

q 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

r 

s 

s 

s 

s 

s 

s 

s 

s 

s 

t 

t 

t 

t 

t 

t 

t 

t 

t 

u 

u 

u 

u 

u 

u 

u 

u 

u 

V 

V 

V 

V 

V 

V 

V 

V 

V 

w 

w 

w 

w 

w 

w 

w 

w 

w 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

X 

y 

y 

y 

y 

y 

y 

y 

y 

y 

z 

z 

z 

-  z 

z 

z 

z 

z 

z 

LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        27, 

present  in  such  a  problem  as  this.  The  factors  of  size,  of 
geometrical  figure,  and  of  heaviness  or  lightness  of  the  lines 
which  constitute  the  figure  also  play  a  part ;  and  these  two 
latter  factors  are  neither  constant  nor  uniform  in  their  opera- 
tion, as  the  reader  may  infer  from  an  examination  of  the 
faces  which  are  illustrated  in  Tables  I,  II,  III,  V,  VI, 
VII,  VIII,  IX,  X,  XI  and  XII. 

It  is  true  that  all  of  the  letters  employed  in  the  investi- 
gation were  printed  in  ten-point  size.  But  the  type-founder's 
unit  of  measurement  refers  to  the  size  of  the  block  of  metal 
upon  whose  base  the  letter  is  cast,  and  not  to  the  size  of 
the  letter  itself.  It  is,  of  course,  true  that  the  size  of  the  block 
of  metal  sets  a  limit  which  the  size  of  the  letter  cannot  exceed ; 
but  the  size  of  the  letter  may  be,  and  usually  is,  less  than 
the  size  of  the  block  of  metal  which  supports  it  and  which 
determines  the  number  of  'points'  which  shall  technically 
describe  the  size  of  the  letter.  Indeed,  it  is  not  unusual  to 
cast,  say,  an  eight-point  letter  upon  a  ten-point  body ;  and 
a  much  greater  difference  between  size  of  letter  and  size 
of  body  is  possible,  although  greater  divergences  are  neither 
customary  nor  commendable. 

Hence,  the  fact  that  all  of  our  letters  are  technically 
described  as  being  of  ten-point  size  does  not  guarantee  that 
they  shall  all  be  of  uniform  width,  nor  even  of  uniform 
height.  There  are  certain  letters,  the  w's  and  the  m's,  which 
must,  in  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  be  wider  than  others, 
the  i's  and  the  I's ;  and  even  the  widths  of  the  m  and  the  w 
may  vary,  from  face  to  face,  if  only  the  draughtsmen  who 
design  them  choose  to  have  it  so.  Nor  are  the  heights  of  ten- 
point  letters  necessarily  constant  and  uniform.  Moreover,  the 
lines  which  constitute  the  letter- form  are  themselves  subject  to 
variation ;  they  may  be  faint,  they  may  be  heavy,  they  may 
be  bold,  they  may  contain  both  hair-lines  and  heavy  lines, 
or  they  may  contain  lines  of  only  one  width  or  thickness 
throughout.  Hence,  any  discussion  of  our  results  must  con- 
sider the  possible  operation  of  three  factors  which  may  have 
to  do  with  the  legibility  of  letters :  letter-form,  size  of  letter, 
width  of  lines  of  letter.     And  when   we  come  to  the  dis- 


24  ROETHLEIN 

cussion  of  the  results  obtained  from  groups  of  letters,  we 
shall  see  that  yet  a  fourth  factor — the  extent  of  white  margin 
around  the  letter — plays  an  important  role, 

A  survey  of  Tables  I,  II  and  III  shows  that,  as  a  matter 
of  fact,  all  three  variables  are  represented  in  the  letters 
which  were  employed.  But  if,  for  the  moment,  we  ignore 
these  details,  and  seek  to  determine  which  of  these  sixteen 
faces,  as  actually  employed  in  the  art  of  printing,  is  the 
most  readily  legible  when  presented  singly,  we  find  an  ex- 
ceedingly interesting  state  of   affairs. 

Confining  our  attention  first  to  the  upper  case  letters,  we 
discover  that  the  Jenson  face  has  a  considerable  lead  over 
all  of  its  competitors.  The  letters  of  the  Jenson  face  were 
read,  on  the  average,  at  a  distance  of  approximately  282  cm., 
while  the  average  for  the  sixteen  faces  is  ca.  254  cm.  The 
least  legible  face  is  American  Typev/riter, — which,  indeed, 
is  much  less  legible  than  any  other  face  of  the  sixteen.  The 
other  fourteen  faces  fall  into  three  groups.  The  most  legible 
group  contains  (besides  Jenson)  Bulfinch,  Century  Oldstyle, 
Clearface,  Cheltenham  Oldstyle,  Delia  Robbia,  Century  Ex- 
panded, News  Gothic;  Caslon  Oldstyle,  Cushing  Oldstyle, 
DeVinne  No.  2  and  Ronaldson  constitute  the  second  group ; 
while  Cushing  Monotone  and  Cushing  No.  2  come  next  in 
order,  with  American  Typewriter  standing  in  a  class  by  itself, 
as  the  least  legible  face. 

Jenson  was  much  less  successful  in  designing  a  legible 
lower  case  face ;  his  lower  case  characters  are  indeed  scarcely 
more  legible  than  the  median  of  the  sixteen  faces.  News 
Gothic  proved  to  be  the  most  legible  of  the  lower  case  faces ; 
and  Cushing  No.  2  is  the  least  legible  face  of  this  series. 
Here  the  sixteen  faces  fall  naturally  into  three  groups : 
I.  News  Gothic,  Bulfinch,  Clearface,  Century  Oldstyle,  Cen- 
tury Expanded  and  Cheltenham  Wide;  2.  Jenson,  Delia 
Robbia,  Cushing  Oldstyle,  Ronaldson  Oldstyle,  Cheltenham 
Oldstyle,  DeVinne  No.  2,  American  Typewriter  and  Caslon 
Oldstyle;  5.  Cushing  Monotone  and  Cushing  No.  2.  The 
difference  between  the  least  legible  face  and  the  most  legible 
face  is  much  less  in  the  lower  case  letters  than  in  the  upper 


LEGIBILITY  OF   DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        25 

case  letters, — twenty-one  per  cent,  as  compared  with  thirty 
per  cent. 

The  briefest  examination  of  the  letters  which  were  em- 
ployed in  our   investigation   is   sufficient  to  show  that  they 
differ  not  only  in  their  form,  but  also  in  their  size,  and  in 
the  thickness  or  heaviness  of  the  lines  which  constitute  them. 
In  order  to  obtain  a  clearer  insight  into  the  relative  signifi- 
cance of  each  of  these  variable  factors  as  determinants  of 
legibility,  we  made  accurate  measurements  of  the  height  and 
the  width  of  certain  lower  case  letters  of  each  face,  as  well 
as  of  the  breadth  of  the  lines   which  go  to  make  up  the 
letters.     Our  measurements  were  made  by  means  of  a  micro- 
scope which  was  equipped  with  a  micrometer  scale.     Three 
letters,  m,  o  and  z,  were  selected  for  measurement ;  and  it  is  as- 
sumed that  the  average  size  of  these  three  letters,  chosen  from 
any  face,  may  be  regarded  as  being  typical  or  representative 
of   the   relative   size   of   all  of   the  letters   of   the   complete 
alphabet   of   the   face  to   which   they   belong.     In   order  to 
make  it  possible  to  institute  a  comparison  between  the  size 
and   the   "blackness"   or  "heaviness"   of   any   face   of   type, 
on  the  one  hand,  and  its  degree  of  legibility,  on  the  other, 
the  following  table  is  appended.   The  first  column  contains  the 
list  of  sixteen  faces,  arranged  in  order  of  legibility.  The  num- 
bers in  the  second  column  indicate  the  average  width,  ex- 
pressed in  microns,  of  the  m,  o  and  z  of  the  face  whose  name 
appears   upon  the  same   line  in  the  first   column ;    and   the 
third  column  specifies  the  average  height  of  the  same  three 
letters.      The    numbers    in    the   fourth    column    indicate   the 
thickness  of  the  stem  of  the  i  of  each  face,  also  expressed 
in  microns.     Each  number  in  the  fifth  column  is  obtained  by 
multiplying  the  height  of  the  letter  by  its  width ;    each  of 
these  numbers  may  be  assumed  to  represent  the  coefficient 
of  area  of  a  typical  letter  of  each  face.      The  numbers  in 
the    sixth  column   are  obtained   by  multiplying  the  number 
which     represents     the     area-coefficient     by     the     number 
which   represents   the  breadth   of   the  principal   lines   which 
constitute   the    letter:    these   numbers    in   the    sixth    column 
may,  therefore,  be  regarded  as  area-breadth  coefficients  which 


ROETHLEIN 


TABLE  XIII.     ISOLATED  LETTERS 

Showing  the  Width  and  the  Height  of  Letter,  and  the 
Thickness  of  Line,  Employed  in  the  Various  Faces, 
and  their  relation  to  legibility. 


1.  News  Gothic  .  . 

2.  Bulfinch    

3.  Clearface    .... 

4.  Century  O.   S.. 

5.  Century    Exp.  . 

6.  Cheltenham   W. 

7.  Jensen  O.  S.  . . 

8.  Delia  Robbia. .  . 

9.  Gushing  O.  S.. 
10.  Ronaldson  O.  S 

Ghelt.   O.    S.. 


II. 

12.  DeVinne  No.  2. 

13.  Am.    Typwr. .  . 

14.  Gaslon   O.   S.. . 

15.  Gushing    Mon.. 

16.  Gushing  No.  2. 


Wide 

High 

Thick 

hXw 

hXv.-Xt 

Aver- 
age dis- 
tance 

1933 

1982 

333 

3831 

1277 

236 

2033 

1800 

328 

3659 

1200 

234 

1840 

1750 

333 

3220 

1073 

230 

1944 

1780 

300 

3460 

1038 

228 

1813 

1766 

300 

3202 

961 

227 

1833 

1420 

317 

2603 

823 

224 

1812 

1560 

3^7 

2827 

896 

215 

1757 

1602 

275 

2815 

774 

214 

1553 

1700 

333 

2640 

880 

213 

1613 

I481 

243 

2389 

580 

209 

1523 

1440 

316 

2193 

693 

206 

1853 

I5IO 

450 

2798 

1259 

205 

1544 

1820 

2(X) 

2810 

562 

202 

161I 

1420 

292 

2288 

668 

202 

I47I 

1464 

220 

2154 

474 

191 

1493 

1480 

200 

2210 

442 

186 

represent  the  relative  size  of  letter  and  breadth  of  line  which 
appear  in  the  several  faces.®  Now  an  examination  of  the 
numbers  in  the  fifth  column  shows  that  there  is,  in  the  upper 
part  of  the  column  at  least,  an  approximate  correlation  be- 
tween size  of  letter  and  degree  of  legibility.  And  when 
"heaviness"  of  line  is  also  taken  into  consideration,  as  is 
done  in  the  sixth  column,  one  finds  that  the  correlation  is 
even  more  striking,  for  the  first  eight  faces  of  the  list.  The 
fact  that  degree  of  legibility  is  correlated,  at  least  in  this 
approximate  fashion,  with  size  of  letter  and  breadth  of  line 

'  The  numbers  in  the  fifth  and  the  sixth  columns  are  intended  to 
represent  relative  magnitudes  only.  In  order  to  facilitate  comparison 
we  have  omitted  several  of  the  right-hand  digits, — three  from  the 
numbers  of  the  fifth  column,  six  from  the  numbers  of  the  sixth 
column. 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        27 

of  letter,  leads  one  to  suspect  that,  in  these  eight  faces  at  least, 
the  size  of  the  letters  and  the  amount  of  ink  imprinted  upon 
the  paper  by  the  lines  of  the  letter  were  the  chief  determinants 
of  legibility ;  and  that  such  variants  of  letter-form  as  were 
represented  in  these  eight  faces  played  no  essential  part  in 
determining  the  legibility  of  the  letters. 

The  less  legible  faces  of  the  list  do  not  show  such  a  perfect 
correlation.  The  lack  of  correlation  is  most  evident  in  the 
case  of  DeVinne  No.  2,  which  apparently  should  stand  near 
the  head  of  the  list  if  size  of  letter  and  breadth  of  inked 
lines  vvere  the  chief  determinants  of  legibility.  But  it  will 
be  noticed  that  this  face  contains  by  far  the  heaviest  lines 
of  the  series ;  and  its  relative  illegibility  is  probably  due  to 
the  fact  that  the  optimal  width  of  line  is  here  exceeded, 
and  that,  in  consequence,  the  white  spaces  within  the  letters 
have  been  encroached  upon  in  so  great  degree  as  to  pro- 
mote illegibility.  It  would  appear  that  the  optimal  breadth 
of  line  for  lower  case  letters  of  this  size  may  be  in  the 
neighborhood  of  275  to  333  microns.  It  seems  to  be  evident 
from  our  table  that,  when  the  breadth  is  reduced  much  below 
250,  or  is  increased  in  the  neighborhood  of  450,  ten-point 
letters  become  relatively  illegible. 

It  is  scarcely  possible,  from  the  data  at  hand,  to  make  any 
definite  general  statement  regarding  the  relative  significance  of 
the  three  factors  in  question.  Javal  and  others  have  insisted 
that  the  width  of  the  letter  is  of  prime  significance  as  a  deter- 
minant of  legibility.  And  the  fact  that  Cheltenham  Wide, 
lower  case,  is  read  at  an  average  distance  of  two  hundred 
and  twenty-four  centimeters,  while  Cheltenham  Oldstyle, 
which  differs  from  the  former  scarcely  at  all  save  in  its 
lesser  width,  is  read  only  at  two  hundred  and  six  centimeters, 
seems  to  confirm  Javal's  statement.  But  our  experiments 
have  convinced  us  that  width  of  letter  is  but  one  of  several 
factors  which  contribute  to  legibility ;  and  one  could  assert 
with  quite  as  much  justice  that  the  breadth  of  the  lines  which 
constitute  the  letter  is  the  essential  determinant  of  legibility. 
This  latter  statement,  however,  is  true,  if  at  all,  only  within 
relatively  narrow  limits. 


28  ROETHLEIN 

The  results  which  appear  in  Tables  V  and  VI  are  of  interest 
in  this  connection.  Our  experimental  material  here  consisted 
of  alphabets  which  represented  a  series  of  modifications  of 
a  given  face.  Cheltenham  Oldstyle  may  be  regarded  as  our 
standard  face;  Cheltenham  Bold,  Cheltenham  Bold-Con- 
densed, Cheltenham  Wide  and  Cheltenham  Italic  represent 
modifications  of  our  standard  letter-form  in  the  directions 
of  greater  heaviness  of  face,  lesser  width  of  letter-form, 
greater  width  of  letter-form,  and  inclined  or  italic  letter- 
form. 

A  survey  of  these  results  reveals  the  fact  that  legibility 
is  very  much  increased  by  increased  heaviness  of  face.  In 
the  upper  case  letters  the  increase  in  heaviness  or  breadth 
of  line  amounted  to  approximately  forty-seven  per  cent., 
and  the  increase  in  legibility  amounted  to  twelve  per  cent. ; 
while  in  the  lower  case  letters  the  corresponding  data  are 
forty-seven  and  fourteen  per  cent.  When  the  Cheltenham 
Bold  face  is  condensed  by  about  twenty-three  per  cent.,  as 
is  illustrated  in  the  letters  which  appear  in  the  third  column 
of  Table  VI,  its  increase  of  legibility  is  lost, — being  re- 
duced by  twelve  per  cent.  This  finding  indicates  that  what- 
ever advantage  might  have  been  derivable  from  increased 
heaviness  of  face,  as  compared  wnth  Cheltenham  Oldstyle, 
is  neutralized  by  a  disadvantage  which  is  due  to  a  narrowing 
of  the  internal  spaces  within  the  letters,  and  a  consequent 
sacrifice  of  detail.  When  the  letter-form  is  broadened  by 
eighteen  per  cent.,  its  legibility  is  increased  by  nine  per  cent. 
The  Italic  letter-form  proves  to  be  but  slightly  less  legible 
than  the  Roman  face.  In  both  the  upper  case  and  the  lower 
case  letters,  the  bold  face  is  the  most  legible  member  of  the 
series  of  modifications. 

The  data  which  are  presented  in  Table  IV  show  the  rela- 
tive legibility  of  each  letter  of  the  alphabet,  both  upper  case 
and  lower  case,  when  presented  as  isolated  letters.  The 
numbers  which  appear  in  these  columns  represent  the  aver- 
ages of  the  readings  of  the  sixteen  faces  of  each  letter. 
The  upper  case  letters  are,  of  course,  legible  at  a  greater  aver- 
age distance  from  the  observer  than  the  lower  case  letters.  But 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT   FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        29 

the  average  legibility  of  both  cases  varies  between  wide 
limits;  and  it  is  a  significant  fact  that  certain  of  the  latter 
letters  are  more  legible  than  many  of  the  former.  The 
progressive  decrease  of  legibility  from  the  upper  limit  to  the 
lower  limit  is  fairly  regular  and  uniform  throughout,  in  both 
cases,  with  the  exception  of  m  and  s.  Indeed,  our  results 
show  that  the  lower  case  s  is  by  far  the  least  legible  letter 
of  either  alphabet.  The  upper  case  S  also  stands  at  the 
foot  of  its  class,  but  the  relative  inferiority  is  here  much 
less  than  in  the  lower  case  letter. 

Any  movement  which  plans  to  improve  the  forms  of  the 
letters  of  the  alphabet  must  properly  begin  with  the  letters 
which  appear  in  the  lower  half  of  this  table.  And,  indeed,  it 
might  well  confine  itself,  at  the  outset  at  least,  to  the  lower 
case  letters,  for  the  twofold  reason  that  they  are,  in  general, 
less  legible  than  upper  case  letters  and  are  therefore  most 
in  need  of  reformation,  and  that  our  reading  has  to  do,  in 
the  main,  with  the  recognition  of  words  which  are  com- 
posed of  lower  case  letters  exclusively.  It  is  not  the  pur- 
pose of  this  paper  to  recommend  or  even  to  suggest  the  pro- 
cedure by  means  of  which  an  increased  legibility  of  printing 
types  is  to  be  attained.  But  it  may,  at  least,  be  mentioned 
in  passing  that  letters  are  made  more  legible  by  an  increased 
heaviness  of  printing-face;  and  that  defective  letters  may 
be  made  more  legible  by  simply  extending  their  width.  Both 
of  these  innovations  would  meet  with  opposition,  however, 
from  those  readers  who  demand  aesthetic  beauty  and  grace 
of  form  as  well  as  legibility.  But  it  seems  possible  that  all 
demands  could  be  met  and  all  interests  could  be  safe-guarded 
if  only  sufficient  skill  and  ingenuity  were  devoted  to  the  task. 

B.      GROUPED  LETTERS 

The  object  of  this  part  of  the  investigation  was  to  de- 
termine how  and  to  what  extent  the  legibility  of  letters  is 
affected  by  the  presence  of  adjacent  letters.  It  was  to  be 
expected  that  the  isolated  letter  should  possess  an  advantage 
over  the  member  of  the  letter-group  in  point  of  average  dis- 
tance at  which  reading  is  possible.    Is  the  disadvantage  which 


30  ROETHLEIN 

results  from  grouping  equally  great  for  each  face?  What 
is  the  relation  between  legibility  and  position  (initial,  final, 
intermediate)  within  the  group  of  letters?  What  light  is 
thrown  upon  our  problem  by  the  number  and  the  nature  of 
the  misreadings  or  confusions  which  are  due  to  the  grouping 
of  letters? 

Isolated  letters  are  invariably  read  at  a  greater  average 
distance  than  are  those  letters  which  occur  in  groups.  Among 
our  material  were  eight  faces  which  had  been  employed  in 
both  of  our  series  of  experiments,  i.  e.,  they  had  been  presented 
singly  in  the  earlier  experiments, — grouped  in  the  later  ex- 
periments. It  is  therefore  possible  to  make  a  direct  com- 
parison between  the  degrees  of  legibility  which  were  revealed 
under  these  two  conditions.  (The  Scotch  Roman  face  can 
not  be  included  in  making  this  comparison,  because  it  was 
employed  only  in  the  later  series  of  experiments.)  The  aver- 
age distance  at  which  these  eight  faces  were  read  in  the 
earlier  experiments  was  232  cm. ;  in  the  later  experiments, 
157  cm.  The  varying  degrees  of  legibility  tend  to  be  re- 
duced to  a  common  level  as  a  result  of  grouping,  i.  e.,  differ- 
ences in  the  legibility  of  different  faces  tend  now  to  disappear. 
While  the  legibility  of  the  eight  faces,  presented  as  single 
letters,  varied  between  the  limits  191  cm.  and  2^6  cm.,  they 
varied  only  between  the  limits  144  cm.  and  166  cm.  when  pre- 
sented in  groups.  And  the  general  reduction  of  legibility 
was  so  great  that  the  most  legible  face  of  grouped  letters 
proved  to  be  wholly  undecipherable  at  a  distance  where  the 
least  legible  face  of  isolated  letters  was  clearly  and  unmis- 
takably legible. 

The  gross  results  of  the  experiments  with  grouped  letters 
are  presented  in  Table  XL  The  average  distances  are  tab- 
ulated in  more  significant  form  in  Table  XIII,  which  also 
contains  a  statement  of  the  relation  between  decreased  legi- 
bility and  size-heaviness  of  face. 

News  Gothic  is  still  the  most  legible  face,  and  Gushing 
Monotone  the  least  legible.  Gentury  Oldstyle,  Gentury  Ex- 
panded, Gheltenham  Wide  and  Gaslon  also  maintain  the  same 
positions  in  the  series  which  they  held  when  isolated  letters 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        3  I 

were  employed.  But  Gushing  Oldstyle,  which  occupied  the 
sixth  position  in  the  former  series,  now  moves  up  to  the 
second  position ;  and  Bulfinch  drops  from  the  second  to  the 
sixth  position.  Scotch  Roman,  the  face  which  had  not  been 
tested  in  the  first  part  of  the  investigation,  stands  seventh 
in  descending  order  of  legibihty. 

Gushing  Oldstyle  and  Bulfinch  are  the  only  faces  which 
show  any  decided  loss  or  gain  in  relative  legibility,  when 
submitted  to  the  group-test.  But  one  is  led  to  inquire  why 
even  these  two  faces  should  fail  to  maintain  the  same  degree 
of  relative  legibility  when  presented  in  groups  which  they 
established  when  presented  as  isolated  letters. 

A  comparison  of  the  amounts  of  reduction  in  legibility 
which  the  various  faces  suffered  from  being  grouped  reveals 
the  fact  that  these  amounts  vary  from  twenty-three  per  cent, 
to  thirty-seven  per  cent.  It  is  inevitable  that  certain  faces 
should  be  subject  to  a  relatively  great  disadvantage  as  a 
result  of  being  combined  into  groups,  and  from  being  printed 
"solid,"  as  upon  the  body  of  an  unleaded  page.  The  letters 
of  certain  faces  are  so  wide  and  so  high  that  a  comparatively 
narrow  margin  is  left  upon  the  block  of  metal  which  con- 
stitutes the  body  of  the  type,  while  in  other  faces  the  margin 
is  relatively  wide.  For  example,  our  measurements  show 
that  the  Bulfinch  m  is  2560  microns  in  width  and  1828 
microns  in  height,  while  the  corresponding  measurements  of 
the  Gheltenham  Oldstyle  m  are  1948  and  1440  microns.  Vari- 
ations in  width  of  letter  need  not  be  considered  here,  because 
there  need  be  no  corresponding  variations  of  width  of  blank 
space  between  adjoining  letters  upon  the  printed  page.  But 
the  difference  in  height  between  the  letters  of  these  two 
faces  is  so  great  that  adjacent  lines  of  the  two,  if  set  "solid," 
would  show  an  intervening  space  of  white  paper  which  would 
be  380  microns  wider  in  the  case  of  Gheltenham  than  in 
the  case  of  Bulfinch.  It  follows  then  that  while  the  ten- 
point  letters  of  greatest  average  height  are  most  legible  when 
presented  singly, — because  they  subtend  a  larger  visual  angle, 
— they  tend  to  lose  their  advantage  when  combined  into 
groups  and  lines, — because  the  lines  are  separated  from  one 


32  ROETHLEIN 

another  by  narrower  intervening  spaces  of  white;  and  the 
reader  finds  that  the  letters  of  adjoining  Hnes  tend  to  merge 
into  one  another. 

The  effect  of  breadth  of  interlinear  space  could  be  shown 
quantitatively  by  correlating  the  average  height  of  each  face 
with  the  relative  amount  of  decrease  in  legibility  which  it  suf- 
fers as  a  result  of  grouping.  It  would  then  be  found  that 
those  faces  whose  average  height  is  greatest  have  suft'ered 
most  from  being  presented  in  groups,  while  those  faces  whose 
average  height  is  least  have  suffered  least.  The  correlation 
becomes  more  striking  however  when  thickness  of  line  as  well 
as  height  of  letter  is  taken  into  account.  But  even  here,  News 
Gothic  and  Gushing  Old  Style  appear  to  be  exceptions  to 
the  general  rule. 

Now  it  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  these  two  types  are  by 
far  the  heaviest  faces  of  the  series.  In  selecting  an  arbitrary 
method  of  giving  quantitative  expression  to  the  combined 
influence  of  the  factors  of  size  of  letter  and  of  heaviness  of 
line,  in  order  that  seriation  and  comparison  might  thereby 
be  facilitated,  we  have  chosen  to  multiply  the  height  of  the 
letter  by  the  thickness  of  the  line.  It  is  evident,  however, 
that  these  two  factors  are  wholly  different  in  their  mode 
of  operation  and  in  their  relation  to  legibility.  The  legibility 
of  a  face  undoubtedly  increases  directly  with  the  increase 
in  the  size  of  the  face;  and  the  ratio  between  the  two  is 
capable  of  simple  quantitative  expression.  But  the  relation 
between  legibility  and  heaviness  of  face  is  far  from  being 
a  simple  one.  Beginning  with  the  faintest  monotone,  legibility 
increases  with  increase  of  thickness  of  line  until  an  optimal 
thickness  of  line,  for  a  given  size  of  letter,  is  reached ;  from 
that  point  onward  legibility  decreases  with  increase  of  thick- 
ness of  line,  because  now  the  internal  details  of  a,  c,  e,  o,  etc., 
are  being  narrowed  down  to  mere  points,  and  discrimination 
of  detail  soon  ceases  to  be  possible.  We  are  not  in  possession 
of  any  data  which  furnish  a  basis  for  estimating  the  point 
at  which  the  optimal  thickness  of  line  is  reached,  nor  for  esti- 
mating the  relative  significance  of  size  of  letter  and  thickness 
of  line.     And  until   such  data  are  obtained  it  will  remain 


LEGIBILITY   OF   DIFFERENT  FACES  OF   PRINTING  TYPES        33 

impossible  to  seriate  the  numbers  in  the  fifth  column  in  any 
just  or  appropriate   fashion. 

Our  results,  however,  indicate  that  the  variations  of  letter- 
form  which  were  present  in  our  nine  faces  did  not  vary- 
between  sufficiently  wide  limits  to  have  any  considerable 
effect  upon  the  relative  legibility  of  our  letters.  Such  differ- 
ences of  legibility  as  were  revealed  are,  we  believe,  refer- 
able solely  to  variations  in  size  of  letter  (and  of  interlinear 
space),  and  to  variations  in  heaviness  of  face. 

If  legibility  is  to  be  our  sole  criterion  of  excellence  of 
type-face,  News  Gothic  must  be  regarded  as  our  nearest 
approximation  to  an  ideal  face,  in  so  far  as  the  present 
investigation  is  able  to  decide  this  question.  The  aesthetic 
factor  must  always  be  taken  into  account,  however,  here 
as  elsewhere.  And  the  reader  who  prefers  the  appearance 
of  Gushing  Oldstyle  or  a  Gentury  face  may  gratify  his 
aesthetic  demands  without  any  considerable  sacrifice  of 
legibility. 

An  examination  of  our  records  of  the  misreadings  of  letters 
throws  an  interesting  light  upon  the  question  of  similarities 
of  letter-form,  and  upon  the  question  of  the  criteria  employed 
by  the  reader  in  deciphering  letters.  When  the  letters  first 
appeared  at  or  beyond  the  extreme  limit  of  reading  distance, 
the  reader  was  usually  conscious,  from  the  outset,  of  a  more 
or  less  definite  Einstelhing.  If  they  were  lower  case  letters, 
and  especially  if  they  were  presented  in  isolated  form,  the 
reader  first  set  out  upon  a  more  or  less  definite  search  for 
the  "broad"  letters, — m  and  w.  He  seldom  failed  to  discover 
these  tvv'o  letters  in  the  earlier  stages  of  the  settings  of  the 
carriage,  although  he  was  seldom  able  to  discriminate  be- 
tween m  and  w  until  the  carriage  had  been  brought  nearer  to 
his  eye.  His  next  endeavor  was  to  find  the  "narrow"  letters, 
— i,  1,  j ;  another  category  was  "  letters  which  are  wider  at 
the  top  than  at  the  bottom," — v,  r;  V,  Y,  T,  F,  P.  Here 
again  he  almost  invariably  succeeded  in  referring  the  letter- 
form  to  its  appropriate  category  some  little  time  before  he 
was  able  to  distinguish  its  details  and  name  it  with  any  de- 
gree   of    certainty.      Other    general    groups    were    "circular 


34  ROETHLEIN 

letters,"— o,  e,  c;  O,  C,  G,  Q;  "square  letters,"— H,  K,  E, 
B,  D.  Among  the  lower  case  letters,  "ascenders"  and  "de- 
scenders" were  almost  invariably  recognized  as  such,  before 
their  details  became  clear.  While  the  reader  was  still 
struggling  with  one  or  other  of  these  categories,  the  "un- 
classified" letter-form  began  to  emerge  in  an  order  which 
can  not  well  be  formulated  in  a  general  statement. 

This  description  of  the  reader's  procedure  indicates  the 
type  of  confusion  or  misreading  which  proved  to  be  most 
frequent.  Letters  which  may  be  regarded  as  members  of  a 
common  category  were  especially  likely  to  be  confused  with 
one  another;  r,  v;  o,  c,  e;  x,  z;  u,  n;  b,  h,  k;  q,  y;  i,  1, 
j,  t,  f;  M,  W;  H,  K,  E,  B,  D;  O,  Q,  C,  G;  V,  YET; 
I  J,  L. 

Several  wholly  new  types  of  misreadings  made  their  ap- 
pearance when  the  letters  were  presented  in  groups.  These 
may  be  described  as  i.  Combinations,  2.  Separations,  and 
3.  Elisions,  i.  It  frequently  happened  that  adjoining  letters 
were  blended  together  by  the  reader,  and  that  a  single  letter 
was  constituted  by  this  combination  of  parts,  or  wholes,  of 
different  letters,  thus:  Ic  (k)  ;  Is  (k)  ;  Ix  (k)  ;  li  (h)  ; 
cl  (d)  ;  cf  (d)  ;  un  (m)  ;  in  (m)  ;  vr  (w)  ;  js  (p)  ;  vj  (y)  ; 
cj  (q);  hj  (ly);  bj  (Iq)  ;  chn  (dm);  ck  (dx).  2.  The 
separation  of  letters  into  their  parts  has  been  illustrated  in 
the  above  group.  It  also  ocurred  in  such  cases  as  wm  (vun)  ; 
Id  (bl)  ;  bj  (Iq)  ;  hj  (ly)  ;  kd  (hcl).  3.  Perhaps  the  most 
striking  misreading  was  due  to  the  complete  elision  of  cer- 
tain letters  of  the  group.  This  phenomenon  was  especially 
common  with  such  slender  or  narrow  letters  as  i,  j,  t,  r,  v,  s. 
When  i  or  t  was  interpolated  between  ascending  letters,  when 
j  occurred  betv/een  descenders,  and  when  r  and  s  were  present 
in  any  context  of  whatever  sort,  they  were  likety  to  be  wholly 
overlooked.  And  it  frequently  happened  in  such  cases  that 
the  observer  read  and  reread  the  group  of  letters,  specifying 
correctly  every  letter  which  was  present  excepting  these 
narrow  letters.  VvHien  the  carriage  had  been  brought  so  close 
to  his  eye  that  he  finally  detected  their  presence,  he  usually 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        35 

expressed  surprise  that  these  "indifferent"  letters  had  escaped 
detection  so  long. 

The  position  of  the  letter  in  the  group — initial,  final,  in- 
termediate— is  an  important  factor  in  determining  the  legi- 
bility of  the  letter.  When  a  group  of  letters  first  comes  into 
view,  it  almost  invariably  happens  that  certain  of  the  letters 
stand  out  more  prominently  than  their  neighbors.  The  part 
which  these  "dominating"  letters  play  in  our  recognition  of 
familiar  words  has  been  discussed  at  length  by  Zeitler,  Mess- 
mer,  and  others,  who  have  pointed  out  that  the  role  of  the 
"indifferent"  letters  in  our  recognition  of  familiar  words  is 
relatively  insignificant.  Pillsbury  and  others  have  shown  that, 
all  other  conditions  being  equal,  the  initial  letter  or  letters 
in  the  word  are  of  most  significance  in  the  act  of  reading. 

In  compiling  the  results  obtained  from  the  reading  of  our 
letter-groups,  we  have  made  three  distinct  tables  of  data, — 
for  the  initial  letters,  for  the  final  letters  and  for  the  inter- 
mediate letters  of  the  groups.  The  latter  results  have  already 
been  presented,  in  Tables  XI  and  XII.  A  comparison  of 
these  three  series  of  average  distances  shows  that  the  initial 
position  constitutes  an  optimal  condition  of  legibility ;  the 
final  position  comes  next  in  order,  and  the  intermediate  posi- 
tion is  least  favorable, — the  general  averages  being  196  cm., 
185  cm.,  and  156  c,  respectively. 

It  must,  of  course,  be  borne  in  mind  that  all  intermediate 
positions  are  not  equally  disadvantageous,  because  the  form  of 
the  adjacent  letters  is  really  an  essential  factor  which  aids 
or  hinders  legibility.  For  instance,  an  m  which  stands  be- 
tween u  and  n  is  much  less  legible  than  an  m  which  stands 
between  o  and  c;  and  the  helpful  or  harmful  influence  of 
ascending  and  descending  letters  is  also  very  great.  The 
significance  of  the  initial  position  or  the  final  position  is  also 
subject  to  variation.  It  is  evident,  for  instance,  that  those 
letters  whose  "loop"  is  upon  the  right, — b,  h,  p, — will  derive 
more  benefit  from  appearing  in  the  final  position  than  will 
those  letters  whose  "loop"  is  upon  the  left, — d,  q,  Yet  the 
superior   advantage  of   the  initial  position  is   so  great  that 


36  ROETHLEIN 

b,  h,  and  p  frequently  proved  to  be  read  at  a  greater  dis- 
tance when  they  appeared  as  initials  than  when  they  appeared 
as  final  letters,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  character- 
istic parts  of  these  letters  appeared  in  close  proximity  to  a 
neighbor  in  the  former  case,  while  in  the  latter  case  they 
jutted  out  into  the  blank  spaces  between  the  groups. 

Lower  case  c  was  read  at  the  following  average  distances : 
Initial  155  cm.,  final  163  cm.,  intermediate  144  cm.  The 
corresponding  data  for  several  other  letters  are:  e,  140,  147, 
123;  o,  158,  153,  143;  b,  187,  198,  155;  d,  200,  165,  143; 
h,  185,  200,  162;  k,  195,  198,  176;  p,  201,  207,  186;  q,  209, 
194,  168;  f,  196,  202,  176.  The  "symmetrical"  letters  show, 
in  more  accurate  quantitative  form,  the  relative  advantages 
of  the  initial  and  the  final  positions;  v,  185,  172,  152;  o,  158, 
153,  143;  m.  163,  156,  151;  w,  210,  199,  189.^ 

The  Relation  Between  Legibility  and  Quality  of 

Paper-Surface 

As  already  indicated,  our  groups  of  letters  were  printed 
in  duplicate  upon  a  coated  book-paper,  and  upon  an  antique 
laid  book-paper.  A  comparison  of  the  average  distances  at 
which  the  letters  were  read  under  these  two  conditions  should 
throw  light  upon  the  general  question  as  to  the  dependence 

^  The  reader  is  again  warned  that  these  data  do  not  warrant  a 
comparison  as  to  the  relative  legibility  of  different  letters  of  the 
alphabet.  The  writer  does  not  guarantee  that  the  juxtapositions  of 
letters  which  occurred  in  our  groups  were  equally  disadvantageous 
for  all  of  the  letters  of  the  groups.  It  is  obviously  an  exceedingly 
difficult  task  to  so  arrange  a  series  of  groupings  that  all  of  the  letters 
in  the  groups  will  be  treated  with  even-handed  justice  in  so  far  as 
advantageous  and  disadvantageous  collocation  with  their  neighbors  is 
concerned.  A  juxtaposition  which  is  relatively  advantageous  to  1  or  h 
may  be  relatively  disadvantageous  to  o  or  v.  This  condition  we  could 
not  hope  to  fulfil ;  our  aim  was  rather  to  treat  all  of  the  faces  with 
equal  fairness, —  to  present  no  combination  of  letters  of  one  face 
which  did  not  recur  in  the  letters  of  every  other  face;  our  data  there- 
fore warrant  a  comparison  of  the  relative  legibilitj^  of  the  various 
faces,  but  not  of  the  relative  legibility  of  the  various  individual  letters 
of  the  same  or  different  faces. 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES    OF  PRINTING  TYPES       37 

of  legibility  upon  the  quality  and  texture  of  paper  employed 
by  the  printer. 

This  question  has  been  raised  in  various  forms,  in  the 
history  of  the  art  of  printing.  Many  years  ago  Babbage 
recommended  the  use  of  slightly  yellowish  paper  for  the 
manufacture  of  books ;  and  indeed,  he  succeeded  in  per- 
suading a  publisher  to  produce  a  book  of  logarithms  in 
accordance  with  this  recommendation.  More  recently  Javal 
has  advocated  a  similar  innovation,  urging  that  such  a  plan 
would  minimize  the  disadvantage  to  which  the  reader  is  sub- 
jected on  account  of  the  intensive  contrast  between  the  black 
ink  and  the  white  paper  which  are  in  general  use. 

It  is  impossible,  from  data  available  in  the  literature  of  this 
and  cognate  topics,  to  determine  whether  this  Babbage-Javal 
suggestion  is  really  of  value.  But  such  results  of  the  present 
investigation  as  have  a  bearing  upon  the  question  would  seem 
to  indicate  that  little  or  no  improvement  of  legibility  is  to 
be  expected  from  progress  in  this  direction. 

The  results  which  we  obtained  in  those  experiments  which 
consisted  in  presenting  groups  of  letters  of  nine  faces  which 
had  been  printed  upon  coated  white  paper  and  rough-finished, 
very  slightly  yellowish  paper,  show  a  surprisingly  slight  differ- 
ence of  legibility  in  the  two  cases.  The  average  distance  at 
which  the  letters  were  read  in  the  former  case  was  144.9  cm., 
and  in  the  latter  case,  145.0  cm.  Altogether  234  letters  were 
employed  in  these  experiments,  and  2,808  readings  were  taken. 
The  experimental  conditions  were  identical  in  the  two  cases, 
excepting  the  difference  in  the  quality,  the  color  and  the 
texture  of  the  paper  upon  which  the  letters  were  printed. 
Occasionally  we  found  individual  differences  among  our  ob- 
servers,— a  greater  efificiency  when  a  particular  face  of  type 
appeared  upon  the  one  or  other  of  the  papers ;  but  in  not  a 
single  instance  does  the  individual  difference  in  legibility 
amount  to  more  than  three  per  cent. ;  and  in  no  instance  did  we 
find  a  unanimous  preference  of  either  paper  with  any  face  of 
type.  Not  only  then  are  the  individual  variations  so  slight 
as  to  be  negligible,  but  they  are  so  irregular  and  inconstant 
as   to  be  subsumable  under  no  general  principle.     And  the 


38  ROETHLEIN 

only  conclusion  which  they  warrant  is  that  even  such  a  con- 
siderable difference  as  was  represented  in  our  two  papers 
has  little  or  no  significance   for  legibility. 

V.     CONCLUSIONS 

1.  Certain  faces  of   type  are   much  more  legible  than  other 

faces;  and  certain  letters  of  every  face  are  much  more 
legible  than  other  letters  of  the  same  face. 

2.  These  differences   in  legibility  prove  to  be  greater  when 

letters  are  presented  in  isolation  from  one  another  than 
when  they  are  presented  in  groups. 

3.  Legibility  is  a  product  of  six  factors :     i.  the  form  of  the 

letter ;  2.  the  size  of  the  letter ;  j.  the  heaviness  of  the  face 
of  the  letter  (the  thickness  of  the  lines  which  constitute 
the  letter)  ;  4.  the  width  of  the  white  margin  which  sur- 
rounds the  letter ;  5.  the  position  of  the  letter  in  the  let- 
ter-group; 6.  the  shape  and  size  of  the  adjacent  letters. 
In  our  experiments,  the  first  factor  seemed  to  be  less 
significant^  than  any  of  the  other  five,  i.e.,  in  the  t3^pe- 
faces  which  were  employed  in  the  present  investigation, 
the  form  of  any  given  letter  of  the  alphabet  usually 
varied  between  such  narrow  limits  as  to  constitute  a 
relatively  insignificant  factor  in  the  determination  of  its 
legibility. 

4.  The  relatively  heavy-faced  types  prove  to  be  more  legible 

than  the  light-faced  types.  The  optimal  heaviness  of 
face  seems  to  lie  in  a  mean  between  the  bold  faces  and 
such  light  faces  as  Scotch  Roman  and  Gushing  Mono- 
tone. 

5.  The  initial  position  in  a  group  of  letters  is  the  most  advan- 

tageous position  for  legibility;  the  final  position  comes 
next  in  order  of  advantage,  and  the  intermediate  or 
internal  positions  are  least  favorable  for  legibility. 

6.  The  size  and  the  form  of  the  letters  which  stand  adjacent 

to  any  given  letter  play' an  important  role  in  determining 
its  legibility ;  and  the  misreadings  which  occur  in  the 
case  of  grouped  letters  are  of  a  wholly  different  sort 
from  those  which  occur  in  the  case  of  isolated  letters. 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES       39 

When  letters  of  the  same  height  or  of  similar  form 
appear  side  by  side,  they  become  relatively  illegible.  But 
the  juxtaposition  of  an  ascender,  a  descender  and  a  short 
letter  tends  to  improve  the  legibility  of  each,  as  also  does 
the  juxtaposition  of  letters  which  are  made  up  wholly 
or  chiefly  of  straight  lines,  and  letters  which  are  made 
up  wholly  or  chiefly  of  curved  lines. 

7.  The  quality  and  the  texture  of  the  paper  is  a  much  less 

significant  factor  than  has  been  supposed, — provided, 
of  course,  that  the  illumination  and  the  inclination  of  the 
paper  are  such  as  to  secure  an  optimal  condition  of 
light  reflection  from  its  surface. 

8.  There  is  an  urgent  need  for  modification  of  certain  letters 

of  the  alphabet. 

VI.     BIBLIOGRAPHY 

1.  Babbage,  C.    Table  of  the  Logarithms  of  the  Natural  Numbers. 

(Introd.)    London,  1838. 

2.  Baxt,  N..   Uber  die  Zeit  welche  notig  ist,  damit  ein  Gesichtsein- 

druck  zum  Bewusstsein  kommt.  Arch.  f.  d.  ges.  Physiol. 
(PMger),  IV,   1871,  325-336. 

3.  Beer,    M.    Die  Abhangigkeit   der    Lesezeit    von    psychologischen 

und  sprachlichen  Faktoren.  Zeitschr.  f.  Psychol.,  LVI,  1910, 
264-298. 

4.  Becher,   E.     Experimentelle  und  kritische  Beitrage  zur   Psycho- 

logie  des  Lesens  bei  kurzen  Expositionszeiten.  Zeitschr.  f. 
Psychol,  XXXVI,  1904,  19-74. 

5.  Brandi,  K.     Unsere  Schrift;  Drei  Abhandlungen  zur  Einfiihrung 

in  die  Geschichte  der  Schrift  und  des  Buchdrucks.  Gottingen, 
1911,  80  pp. 

6.  Cattell,  J.   McK.    The  Inertia  of  the  Eye  and   Brain.     Brain, 

VIII,  1886,  295-313. 

7.  Cattell,  J.  McK.    Ueber  die  Zeit  der  Erkennung  und  Benennung 

von  Schriftzeichen,  Bildern  und  Farben.  Phil.  Stud.,  II,  1885, 
634-650. 

8.    .     Psychometrische  Untersuchungen.    Phil.  Stud.,  Ill,  1886, 

305-335;  452-493- 

9.  CoHN,  H.     Hygiene  of  the  Eye  in  Schools.     London,  1886.     236 

pp. 

10.  Dearborn,   W.   F.    The   Psychology  of   Reading.      N.   Y.,    1906, 

134  PP- 

11.  deVinne,   T.    L.     The   Practice  of  Typography:      Plain   Printing 

Types.    N.  Y.,  2nd  ed.,  1902,  403  pp. 


40 


ROETHLEIN 


12. 
13- 

14- 

15- 

i6. 
17- 

i8. 
19. 
20. 
21. 
22. 

24. 

25- 
26. 

27- 

28. 

29. 
30. 

31. 

32. 


DocKERAY,  F.  C.  The  Span  of  Vision  in  Reading,  and  the  Legi- 
bihty  of  Letters.    Jour,  of  Educat.   Psychol.,  I,    1910,    123-131. 

Dodge,  R.  Five  Types  of  Eye-movements  in  the  Horizontal  Mer- 
idian Plane  of  the  Field  of  Regard.     Amer.  Jour,  of  Physiol., 

VIII,  1902-3,  307-329- 

.      The    Illusion    of    Clear    Vision    during    Eye    Movement. 

Psychol.  Bull,  II.  igos,  193-199. 
.       Eine    experimentelle     Studie     der    visuellen    Fixation. 


Zeitschr.  f.  Psychol.,  LII,    1909,   321-424. 
Erdmann,    B.    and    Dodge,    R.     Psychologische    Untersuchungen 

iiber  das  Lesen.     Flalle,  1898,  360  pp. 
ExNER,  S.     Uber  die  zu  einer  Gesichtsv^rahrnehmung  notige  Zeit. 

Sitsungsber.  d.  Acad.  d.   Wisscnsch.  in  Wien,   LVIII,  Abth.  II, 

1868,  601-632. 
FiNZi,  J.     Zur  Untersuchung  der  Auffassungs-  und  Merkfahigkeit. 

Psychol.  Arheiten   (Kraepelin's),  III,  1900,  289-384. 
GoLDSCHEiDER,  A.  und  MuLLER,  E.     Zur  Psychologic  und  Patho- 
logic d.  Lesens.    Zeitschr.  f.  klin.  Med.,  XXIII.,  1893,  131-167. 
Gress,  G.  E.     The  Art  and  Practice  of  Typography.     N.  Y.,  1910. 

160  pp. 
Griffing,  H.  and  Franz,  S.  I.    On  the  Conditions  of  Fatigue  in 

Reading.     Psychol.  Rev.,  Ill,   1896,  513-520. 
Huey,    E.    B.     Preliminary   Experiments   in   the   Physiology    and 

Psychology  of  Reading.   Amer.  Jour.  Psychol,  IX,  1898,  576-586. 
Huey,   E.   B.     On   the    Psychology   and    Physiology   of   Reading. 

Amer.  Jour.  Psychol,  XI,  1900,  283-303;  XII,  1901,  292-313. 
Huey,  E.  B.     The  Psychology  and  Pedagogy  of  Reading.     N.  Y., 

1908.     469  pp. 
Hylan,  J.  P.     The  Distribution  of  Attention.     Psychol.  Rev.,  X, 

1903,  373-403;  498-533- 
Javal,    E.      L'evolution    de    la    typographic.      Revue    scientiUque, 

XXVI,   1881,  802-814. 
Javal,  E.     Physiologic  de  la  lecture  et  de  I'ecriture.    2me  edition. 

Paris,  1906.     296  pp. 
Kirschmann,  a.     Ubcr  die  Erkennbarkeit  geometrischer  Figuren 

und    Schriftzcichen    im    indirekten    Sehen.       Arch.    f.    d.    ges. 

Psychol,  XIII,   1908,  352-389. 
Koopman,  H.  L.     Scientific  Tests  of  Types.      The  Printing  Art, 

XIII,  1909,  81-83. 
Koopman,  H.  L.    Types  and  Eyes.     The  Printing  Art,  XII,  1909, 

359-361. 
Maire,  a.     La  technique  du  livre.     Paris,  1908.     388  pp. 
Messmer,   O.     Zur    Psychologic    des    Lesens    bei    Kindern    und 

Erwachsenen.    Arch.  f.  d.  ges.  Psychol,  II,  1903,  190-298. 


LEGIBILITY  OF  DIFFERENT  FACES  OF  PRINTING  TYPES        41 

33.  PiLLSBURY,    W.    B.    A    Study    of     Apperception.       Amer.    Jour. 

Psychol,  VIII,  1897,  315-393. 

34.  QuANTz,  J.  O.     Problems  in  the  Psychology  of  Reading.    Psychol. 

Rev.  Mon.,   II,   1897,   1-51. 

35.  Sanford,   E.   C.    The  Relative    Legibility  of    the  Small   Letters. 

Amer.  Jour.  Psychol.,  I,  1888,  402-435. 

36.  ScHULTZ,    A.    J.    Untersuchungen    iiber    die    Wirkung    gleicher 

Reize  auf  die  Erfassung  bei  momentaner  Exposition.     Zeitschr. 
f.  Psychol,  LII,  1909,  110-148;  238-296. 

37.  Schumann,   F.     Psychologic  des  Lesens.     Bericht  iiber  den  II. 

Kongress  f.    exp.    Psychol.    {Wursburg,    1906).     Leipzig,    1907, 
153-186. 

38.  ScHWENDER,  J.     Die  wichtigsten  Ergebnisse  der  experimentellen 

Untersuchungen  iiber  das  Lesen.     Zeitschr.  f.    exp.    Pddagogik, 
IX,  1909,  169-224. 

39.  Shaw^  E.  R.     School  Hygiene.     N.  Y.,  1901,  255  pp. 

40.  Zeitler,  J.    Tachistoskopische  Untersuchungen   iiber  das   Lesen. 

Phil  Stud.,  XVI,  1900,  380-465. 


1 
14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or 
on  the  date  to  which  renewed. 

Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 

viuH?    y-j^^' 

j 

General  Library 
LD  21-50m-8,'57                                   University  of  California 
(,C8481sl0)476                                                    Berkeley 

Stockton,  Calif. 
T.M.  Reg.  U.S.  Pat.  Off. 


z 


1-1^ ' 


^J--J 


THE  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


